Is Armstrong about to admit

[Ferminal]

Maybe I should be following Bob...

 

[Mich78BEL]

The words of more than someone, the words of many someones, should be more than enough.

i seriously doubt it's enough, he probably has several ex-teammates who will say he never doped...

only cold hard evidence will be enough

 

[BroDeal]

i seriously doubt it's enough, he probably has several ex-teammates who will say he never doped...

only cold hard evidence will be enough

That is why I plan to make a few extra bucks robbing banks. Even when my henchmen get caught and testify against me, I will get a few ex-friends to say I never robbed a bank. Despite the fact that people get convicted every day from testimony of co-conspirators, I am confident that this is a cunning plan which cannot fail.

 

[Merckx index]

i seriously doubt it's enough, he probably has several ex-teammates who will say he never doped...

only cold hard evidence will be enough

”If they got enough former teammates to testify against Lance, that would carry significant weight in a court of law. It would establish that the USPS team did pay for doping products or assistance."

"If, for example, Armstrong denies he ever doped and Novitzky can produce evidence showing the USPS team bought illegal drugs, and he also has several teammates testify that Lance was involved, then Novitzky could send him to jail."

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5...-if-there-is-a-money-trail.aspx#ixzz0yUDrNkS6

 

[docbarber]

LA might want to call Johnny Cochrane

Do they really have something on him? Serious evidence? So far, i only heard someone else words versus the words over Armstrong and his entourage... If thats all they have nothing will happen.

Hi Mich- "serious evidence" in this government probe is quite different than the kind of evidence used by UCI / CAS in their tribunals. If Armstrong is indicted, it would probably be on various civil and criminal charges relating to contractual fraud / tax evasion / illegal trafficking of controlled substances. These charges would be tried in court, likely to a jury. In those circumstances, the jury should be able to convict based on one credible eyewitness- for example, Floyd Landis. Of course, Landis in many ways lacks credibility, but if a few other eyewitnesses were to corroborate the same or similar facts that Landis testifies to, then a jury may have a basis for a finding of guilt on some charges against Armstrong.

In short, if the current allegations against Armstrong lead to an indictment and then jury trial, all bets are off. Anything can happen once the jury gets involved. Remember what happened in OJ's criminal trial? From outside the courtroom, OJ's guilt seemed fairly obvious to a lot of people. But inside the courtroom, the jury saw things differently, and OJ was acquitted. The same could happen with Armstrong- i.e., to us observing from outside the courtroom, it may seem like reliable evidence is lacking. But a jury will experience the evidence in a whole different context, which depending on skill of the attorneys, bias of the judge, etc., could result in major pain for LA.

 

[Anonymous]

Hi Mich- "serious evidence" in this government probe is quite different than the kind of evidence used by UCI / CAS in their tribunals. If Armstrong is indicted, it would probably be on various civil and criminal charges relating to contractual fraud / tax evasion / illegal trafficking of controlled substances. These charges would be tried in court, likely to a jury. In those circumstances, the jury should be able to convict based on one credible eyewitness- for example, Floyd Landis. Of course, Landis in many ways lacks credibility, but if a few other eyewitnesses were to corroborate the same or similar facts that Landis testifies to, then a jury may have a basis for a finding of guilt on some charges against Armstrong.

In short, if the current allegations against Armstrong lead to an indictment and then jury trial, all bets are off. Anything can happen once the jury gets involved. Remember what happened in OJ's criminal trial? From outside the courtroom, OJ's guilt seemed fairly obvious to a lot of people. But inside the courtroom, the jury saw things differently, and OJ was acquitted. The same could happen with Armstrong- i.e., to us observing from outside the courtroom, it may seem like reliable evidence is lacking. But a jury will experience the evidence in a whole different context, which depending on skill of the attorneys, bias of the judge, etc., could result in major pain for LA.

That would be quite a trick on Armstrong's part. Cochrane died in 2005.

 

[docbarber]

Johnny Cochrane Dead? Then it appears that LA is screwed...

Or maybe Jacko's attorney is still among the living?

 

[MarkvW]

Stop With The Armstrong Man-Love

Gawd. Everything on this topic is so fixated on Lance. This investigation might not even be focused on Lance. Maybe, just MAYBE, the feds might be targeting dealers rather than users? A possibility maybe?

Sometimes, investigations start at point A and end up at point Z. Lance might even possibly lead to bigger fish . . . hard as that might be for the Lance-fixated to accept.

I enjoy the speculation as much as anybody, but the perverse fixation on Lance grosses me out (just like Lance grosses me out).

 

[Mich78BEL]

Hi Mich- "serious evidence" in this government probe is quite different than the kind of evidence used by UCI / CAS in their tribunals. If Armstrong is indicted, it would probably be on various civil and criminal charges relating to contractual fraud / tax evasion / illegal trafficking of controlled substances. These charges would be tried in court, likely to a jury. In those circumstances, the jury should be able to convict based on one credible eyewitness- for example, Floyd Landis. Of course, Landis in many ways lacks credibility, but if a few other eyewitnesses were to corroborate the same or similar facts that Landis testifies to, then a jury may have a basis for a finding of guilt on some charges against Armstrong.

In short, if the current allegations against Armstrong lead to an indictment and then jury trial, all bets are off. Anything can happen once the jury gets involved. Remember what happened in OJ's criminal trial? From outside the courtroom, OJ's guilt seemed fairly obvious to a lot of people. But inside the courtroom, the jury saw things differently, and OJ was acquitted. The same could happen with Armstrong- i.e., to us observing from outside the courtroom, it may seem like reliable evidence is lacking. But a jury will experience the evidence in a whole different context, which depending on skill of the attorneys, bias of the judge, etc., could result in major pain for LA.

i see, i don't know much about the legal system in the USA but to me this whole affair seems like a waste of time and taxpayersmoney

 

[thehog]

i see, i don't know much about the legal system in the USA but to me this whole affair seems like a waste of time and taxpayersmoney

I'm with you. I want my children to have ready access to drugs when they get into sport. I want the drug networks to be well established and funded by people like Lance so the small fry can get their hands on them.

I say shut this investigation down. Not for Lance's sake but for our children. They need drugs to perform.

 

[Mich78BEL]

I'm with you. I want my children to have ready access to drugs when they get into sport. I want the drug networks to be well established and funded by people like Lance so the small fry can get their hands on them.

I say shut this investigation down. Not for Lance's sake but for our children. They need drugs to perform.

Lance getting convicted or admitting to anything won't change anything on that matter....

 

[bianchigirl]

I believe the focus of the investigation is quite firmly on Mr Armstrong's doping

One thing is now certain, Friedman reports: "The doping investigation is focused on Armstrong and prosecutors are still at an early stage of interviewing witnesses", according to several attorneys who spoke on condition of anonymity.
http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2010/09/inside_the_talk_of_a_lanc.php

 

[Murray]

I'm with you. I want my children to have ready access to drugs when they get into sport. I want the drug networks to be well established and funded by people like Lance so the small fry can get their hands on them.

I say shut this investigation down. Not for Lance's sake but for our children. They need drugs to perform.

Lance is the past. Whatever happens won't affect what drugs will be available in the future.

 

[theswordsman]

Off topic, but I'm not starting a new thread.

The U.S. Justice Department is weighing whether to intervene in a federal whistle-blower lawsuit filed earlier this year by one of Lance Armstrong's former cycling teammates, Floyd Landis, people familiar with the matter say.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703946504575469622694037154.html

 

[thehog]

Off topic, but I'm not starting a new thread.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703946504575469622694037154.html

That's huge. Its the "oh s-it" moment for Lance. He so f+rked right now. I thought a deal was being done. But no. Its jail time. And its all going to spread across the news.

 

[python]

That's huge.

the hog. i couldn't agree more. everyone should read theswordsan's link.

if i'm recalling all the factual articles about the matter including the wsj and nyt etc, this one contains the most damaging information for mr armstrong.

it turns out, landis was 'on the attack' all along.

 

[theswordsman]

That's huge. Its the "oh s-it" moment for Lance. He so f+rked right now. I thought a deal was being done. But no. Its jail time. And its all going to spread across the news.

Looks like it could put a big hurt on his wallet as well. Time to start hiding assets, if it's not already under way. See any Madones in the stack?
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/60ft-bike-obelisk-towers-over-santa-rosa-california-27607

And if the Feds are going after money, people will realize that they're trying to recoup money for the taxpayers, not "waste" it. The the best part is, the lawsuit shouldn't stop the FDA investigation on other fronts. I hope they make the right decision, and I hope it drives home the severity of the situation to more fans.

 

[Tubeless]

Off topic, but I'm not starting a new thread.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703946504575469622694037154.html

This is significant news on 2 fronts:

1. No one was reporting about Landis' own whistleblower legal action until now. It would have been easy for Armstrong's camp to dismiss if #2 did not happen.

2. The fact that DOJ in reviewing about throwing their support for Landis on this existing lawsuit means the pressure on Armstong intensifies and gives the ongoing FDA investigation additional legitimacy.

From Landis' perspective it's open warfare now, he wasn't going to just sit still and take all the accusations quietly. I'd guess he filed this case sometime in May or June after getting legal representation through Greg Lemond's connections.

 

[oldschoolnik]

Lance getting convicted or admitting to anything won't change anything on that matter....

I agree, prosecuting Enron and WorldCom was waste of taxpayer money since it didn't end corporate corruption...

 

[python]

note, that the justice dept basis for getting involved (according to the article) at least in part, is the sca case.

go betsy !

 

[Oldman]

Looks like it could put a big hurt on his wallet as well. Time to start hiding assets, if it's not already under way. See any Madones in the stack?
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/60ft-bike-obelisk-towers-over-santa-rosa-california-27607

And if the Feds are going after money, people will realize that they're trying to recoup money for the taxpayers, not "waste" it. The the best part is, the lawsuit shouldn't stop the FDA investigation on other fronts. I hope they make the right decision, and I hope it drives home the severity of the situation to more fans.

You read this part:
The Postal Service paid $30.6 million to the team's management company to sponsor the team from 2001 through 2004, according to a sponsorship agreement reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. The contract said "negative publicity" due to "alleged possession, use or sale of banned substances" by riders or team personnel would constitute an "event of default," as would a failure to take "action" in the event a rider violates a morals or drug clause.

....and you'll get to the potential fraud for that action. Couple that with any money laundering for purchase of PED's and your into a felony area. Now who serves time is questionable. Barry Bond's trainer stewed in the Federal pokey for not testifying. This will end upstream of Lance and look to some organization. And more and more it's Tailwind's associates that look like the prize.

 

[ManInFull]

Gawd. Everything on this topic is so fixated on Lance. This investigation might not even be focused on Lance. Maybe, just MAYBE, the feds might be targeting dealers rather than users? A possibility maybe?

Sometimes, investigations start at point A and end up at point Z. Lance might even possibly lead to bigger fish . . . hard as that might be for the Lance-fixated to accept.

I enjoy the speculation as much as anybody, but the perverse fixation on Lance grosses me out (just like Lance grosses me out).

Yeah, you could be right. I really don't care if he is convicted of anything. I simply want there to be enough "common sense" testimony/evidence for the general public to believe that he doped--I want him convicted in the court of public opinion.

 

[theswordsman]

I don't recall if it was ESPN, the Wall Street Journal, or the New York Times, but there was talk of the whistle blower act at the very start of this. It was probably also conjecture here, but I'm pretty sure I saw it in some context in the news.

It's about time for Bruyneel's name to start popping up.

The Justice Department could pursue the lawsuit, and the FDA and Grand Jury can keep after everything else - employment law and the Ricco Act stuff. Let's release more hounds into the hunt and raise the stakes, to mix metaphors.

 

[thehog]

I don't recall if it was ESPN, the Wall Street Journal, or the New York Times, but there was talk of the whistle blower act at the very start of this. It was probably also conjecture here, but I'm pretty sure I saw it in some context in the news.

It's about time for Bruyneel's name to start popping up.

The Justice Department could pursue the lawsuit, and the FDA and Grand Jury can keep after everything else - employment law and the Ricco Act stuff. Let's release more hounds into the hunt and raise the stakes, to mix metaphors.

This is very very very big. In a matter of minutes I've seen it hit about 30 mainstream news sources.

More here:
Citing anonymous sources, The Journal reported in a story posted on its website Friday that Landis has filed a suit under the federal False Claims Act. The law allows Americans to sue on behalf of the government alleging the government has been defrauded.

 

[python]

I don't recall if it was ESPN, the Wall Street Journal, or the New York Times, but there was talk of the whistle blower act at the very start of this. It was probably also conjecture here, but I'm pretty sure I saw it in some context in the news.

It's about time for Bruyneel's name to start popping up.

The Justice Department could pursue the lawsuit, and the FDA and Grand Jury can keep after everything else - employment law and the Ricco Act stuff. Let's release more hounds into the hunt and raise the stakes, to mix metaphors.

regarding the first highlight, it was in both the nyt and the wsj. your memory is right because mine is outstanding

regarding the second highlight, the justice dept is already involved via the role of the prosecutor (doug miller) assigned to give novitzky discovery power. so... since the whistleblower law is in the competence of the justice dep too, i recon the evidence gathered by novitzky has been shared, applied and is being considered in the flandis vs armstrong whistle blower case.

the long story short, not only the two postal riders confirmation of flandis's accusations is driving this new case but also in all probability mcilvan has broken down too.