Joe Papp pleads guilty to distributing drugs, pt 2

[python]

If only half of what is reported is correct, anyone hoping for an explanation that justifies Joe's actions is headed for disappointment IMO*. However, I wish Joe well and continue to give him the benefit of the doubt wherever I can, because he spilled the beans. I consciously try to treat riders who name their suppliers differently to those who don't. Choosing to respond differently to riders who behave differently is not a double standard.

From the information available so far, I believe Joe's actions were at least partly motivated by self interest. However, it's entirely possible that he was also motivated by wanting to atone for his crimes. That's one of the areas that I can still give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't see any problem with someone acting partly in self interest, as long as they don't act entirely in self interest. In fact, capable adults who fail to look after themselves are just a burden for whoever gets to pick up the pieces.

There is also reason to believe he wouldn't have become a drug trafficker if he wasn't exposed to the doping culture in cycling (and the endless 'you have to dope to win' marketing from the likes of BigBoat.) So, there's reason to believe that he might change his mind about doping, after being forced to stop riding and face the consequences. Perhaps he now genuinely wants to discourage others from doping; I still give him the benefit of the doubt about that too.

For any of you who are directly involved with CLEAN competitive cycling, please don't assume that I'm trying to persuade you to offer Joe support. I'm not. I don't think the attitude of 'he did the wrong thing and has to pay the price' is entirely unreasonable. Just trying to explain why I chose to defend him.

*Joe, I sincerely apologize if I have underestimated you.

^^a well thought out post, july

 

[Anonymous]

If only half of what is reported is correct, anyone hoping for an explanation that justifies Joe's actions is headed for disappointment IMO*. However, I wish Joe well and continue to give him the benefit of the doubt wherever I can, because he spilled the beans. I consciously try to treat riders who name their suppliers differently to those who don't. Choosing to respond differently to riders who behave differently is not a double standard.

From the information available so far, I believe Joe's actions were at least partly motivated by self interest. However, it's entirely possible that he was also motivated by wanting to atone for his crimes. That's one of the areas that I can still give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't see any problem with someone acting partly in self interest, as long as they don't act entirely in self interest. In fact, capable adults who fail to look after themselves are just a burden for whoever gets to pick up the pieces.

There is also reason to believe he wouldn't have become a drug trafficker if he wasn't exposed to the doping culture in cycling (and the endless 'you have to dope to win' marketing from the likes of BigBoat.) So, there's reason to believe that he might change his mind about doping, after being forced to stop riding and face the consequences. Perhaps he now genuinely wants to discourage others from doping; I still give him the benefit of the doubt about that too.

For any of you who are directly involved with CLEAN competitive cycling, please don't assume that I'm trying to persuade you to offer Joe support. I'm not. I don't think the attitude of 'he did the wrong thing and has to pay the price' is entirely unreasonable. Just trying to explain why I chose to defend him.

*Joe, I sincerely apologize if I have underestimated you.

Good post, I have tried to explain my defense also, but some people are not as willing to forgive. I can understand that too.

 

[mitchman]

It really depends if you (JP customers) were buying roids which are scheduled drugs or EPO’s and HGH which I believe are not scheduled drugs on a federal level….

 

[Oldman]

If only half of what is reported is correct, anyone hoping for an explanation that justifies Joe's actions is headed for disappointment IMO*. However, I wish Joe well and continue to give him the benefit of the doubt wherever I can, because he spilled the beans. I consciously try to treat riders who name their suppliers differently to those who don't. Choosing to respond differently to riders who behave differently is not a double standard.

From the information available so far, I believe Joe's actions were at least partly motivated by self interest. However, it's entirely possible that he was also motivated by wanting to atone for his crimes. That's one of the areas that I can still give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't see any problem with someone acting partly in self interest, as long as they don't act entirely in self interest. In fact, capable adults who fail to look after themselves are just a burden for whoever gets to pick up the pieces.

There is also reason to believe he wouldn't have become a drug trafficker if he wasn't exposed to the doping culture in cycling (and the endless 'you have to dope to win' marketing from the likes of BigBoat.) So, there's reason to believe that he might change his mind about doping, after being forced to stop riding and face the consequences. Perhaps he now genuinely wants to discourage others from doping; I still give him the benefit of the doubt about that too.

For any of you who are directly involved with CLEAN competitive cycling, please don't assume that I'm trying to persuade you to offer Joe support. I'm not. I don't think the attitude of 'he did the wrong thing and has to pay the price' is entirely unreasonable. Just trying to explain why I chose to defend him.

*Joe, I sincerely apologize if I have underestimated you.

Well said. Still have to see how it all pans out.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

If only half of what is reported is correct...

Yes, very good post. Said it better than I could.

 

[Hugh Januss]

If only half of what is reported is correct, anyone hoping for an explanation that justifies Joe's actions is headed for disappointment IMO*. However, I wish Joe well and continue to give him the benefit of the doubt wherever I can, because he spilled the beans. I consciously try to treat riders who name their suppliers differently to those who don't. Choosing to respond differently to riders who behave differently is not a double standard.

From the information available so far, I believe Joe's actions were at least partly motivated by self interest. However, it's entirely possible that he was also motivated by wanting to atone for his crimes. That's one of the areas that I can still give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't see any problem with someone acting partly in self interest, as long as they don't act entirely in self interest. In fact, capable adults who fail to look after themselves are just a burden for whoever gets to pick up the pieces.

There is also reason to believe he wouldn't have become a drug trafficker if he wasn't exposed to the doping culture in cycling (and the endless 'you have to dope to win' marketing from the likes of BigBoat.) So, there's reason to believe that he might change his mind about doping, after being forced to stop riding and face the consequences. Perhaps he now genuinely wants to discourage others from doping; I still give him the benefit of the doubt about that too.

For any of you who are directly involved with CLEAN competitive cycling, please don't assume that I'm trying to persuade you to offer Joe support. I'm not. I don't think the attitude of 'he did the wrong thing and has to pay the price' is entirely unreasonable. Just trying to explain why I chose to defend him.

*Joe, I sincerely apologize if I have underestimated you.

I agree with this, it is hard to believe in JP at this point but still he is owed a certain amount of "benefit of the doubt".
I get a little tired of folks who want to believe in Joe while slamming Flandis, because at this point it seems to me like the difference is that Floyd actually had something to lose. Having just won the TDF with a bad hip that could possibly keep him from ever returning to that level again, what would you do if it was suddenly taken from you for something that you know everyone else is doing too? When the lawyers come in and say "we can get you off, here's what you have to do" what would you have done?
Joe, on the otherhand had much less that they could take away (in terms of palmares) but even more serious charges (what with the dealing and all) so it seems to me like it's pretty easy to make the switch to anti-doping advocate, relatively speaking anyway.
At this point I would not want to be in either one's shoes, but it seems to me that Floyd is less in control of his own life than Joe is, so I feel more sorry for him. They are both pretty effed right now though.

 

[flicker]

I think Floyd was burned by his lawyers and advisors,they led him on and then fleeced him. Soaked of all his financial well being. Papp was caught up in a drug ring. Did it start when he was racing in Asia? What ties those two are the drugs, glory. No pay-off for those two only pain.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

There's still a huge difference between Joe and Floyd in that Joe has at least admitted what he did, apologized, and accepted his punishment. Floyd continues to deny at every step, even in the face of a Mont Ventoux piles of evidence.

 

[Epicycle]

There's still a huge difference between Joe and Floyd in that Joe has at least admitted what he did, apologized, and accepted his punishment. Floyd continues to deny at every step, even in the face of a Mont Ventoux piles of evidence.

I look at it this way...it seems that neither has been up to anything nefarious since 2007. Maybe Floyd would have pulled a Marion Jones and admitted everything if he had been in Joe's shoes. Facing a felony charge in federal court is much different than facing USADA or CAS. So:

Floyd...duped people into donating to his phony defense. With his buddy threatened a witness by exploiting knowledge of his history of sexual abuse. Was party to a computer hacking.

Joe...promoted and provided a drug that can be very lethal.


Floyd did some bad stuff, the Lemond thing was especially abhorrent. And abusing peoples trust to take their money is pretty crappy too. But Joe did something which could have endangered lives. Many of those people may have been able to get EPO anyway but...IF Joe was the one behind eposino.com then he was out there actively trying to win converts so his EPO business would thrive. He was a pusher trying to enact a more effective business model. That's not good. Not good at all. I'm sure he truly understands what he did and feels sorry for it, much more than Floyd. But I think he did the worse thing. I don't think it's something he can't live down or think that he can't still do something very positive with his life. I really hope for the best for Joe and hope he's already on the right path. I'm just following your comparison with Floyd.

 

[blackcat]

I look at it this way...it seems that neither has been up to anything nefarious since 2007. Maybe Floyd would have pulled a Marion Jones and admitted everything if he had been in Joe's shoes. Facing a felony charge in federal court is much different than facing USADA or CAS. So:

Floyd...duped people into donating to his phony defense. With his buddy threatened a witness by exploiting knowledge of his history of sexual abuse. Was party to a computer hacking.

Joe...promoted and provided a drug that can be very lethal.


Floyd did some bad stuff, the Lemond thing was especially abhorrent. And abusing peoples trust to take their money is pretty crappy too. But Joe did something which could have endangered lives. Many of those people may have been able to get EPO anyway but...IF Joe was the one behind eposino.com then he was out there actively trying to win converts so his EPO business would thrive. He was a pusher trying to enact a more effective business model. That's not good. Not good at all. I'm sure he truly understands what he did and feels sorry for it, much more than Floyd. But I think he did the worse thing. I don't think it's something he can't live down or think that he can't still do something very positive with his life. I really hope for the best for Joe and hope he's already on the right path. I'm just following your comparison with Floyd.

+1 Epocycle.

I was disappointed that JP ran eposino, I thought he just had made contacts thru cycling, and it became a spidered network, and he needed money for his family. Not an apologia about the ills, but context.

In Floyd, he took a great amount of funds in, on the premise he was stitched up, and then put it back on "the French" and fomented anti-French sentiment in the wake of 9/11 like Bush. And Landis would consider himself a libertarian probably, dissonance much?

Landis, Baker, Geoghegan committed an immense fraud, how much was it, upwards of 300k, before any StrongArm money tipped in. And he was integral in the phone call to Lemond, and he issued a threat online.

For one who says he has an antipathy for those who wallow in self-pity and do not take responsibility for their actions, Landis is acting pentulantly and more like a psychopath, no show of remorse, and pointing the finger at everyone but himself. Landis fraud of a few hundred k, could find himself in jail.

Joe atleast gets credit for the remorse, only he knows how genuine it is.

 

[rhubroma]

True, but people selling the drugs are harming others......for profit.

It's a market, just like any other one.

Joe behaved poorly, but so did everyone who sought out his services. So let's not forget the responsibility on that end as well.

Whereas burning people at the stake was for heretics, inquisitional stuff. The "moralist" approach is tiresome and, in any case, has never achieved the desired results. That's because it satisfies a want for vendeta, to save face, and does nothing to address the real issue at stake (which is cultural not ethical): namely how has modern society generated a "need" to always go beyond prescribed limits? Through sport just as at the financial markets...In such a scenario, doping isn't some fringe activity of a few "bad apples," but the modus operandi of all, or nearly all, active in the profession.

The sponsors want a return on their investment and pay athletes obscene sums of cash toward that goal. How the game is played to win is irrelevant, so long as one isn't caught, and only insofar as it tarnishs the image of the sponsoring corporate entities before a motralistic public in a world governed by omerta and where hypocrisy has no limit, in which everything is bargained for and everyone is defrauded.

 

[rhubroma]

I look at it this way...it seems that neither has been up to anything nefarious since 2007. Maybe Floyd would have pulled a Marion Jones and admitted everything if he had been in Joe's shoes. Facing a felony charge in federal court is much different than facing USADA or CAS. So:

Floyd...duped people into donating to his phony defense. With his buddy threatened a witness by exploiting knowledge of his history of sexual abuse. Was party to a computer hacking.

Joe...promoted and provided a drug that can be very lethal.


Floyd did some bad stuff, the Lemond thing was especially abhorrent. And abusing peoples trust to take their money is pretty crappy too. But Joe did something which could have endangered lives. Many of those people may have been able to get EPO anyway but...IF Joe was the one behind eposino.com then he was out there actively trying to win converts so his EPO business would thrive. He was a pusher trying to enact a more effective business model. That's not good. Not good at all. I'm sure he truly understands what he did and feels sorry for it, much more than Floyd. But I think he did the worse thing. I don't think it's something he can't live down or think that he can't still do something very positive with his life. I really hope for the best for Joe and hope he's already on the right path. I'm just following your comparison with Floyd.

Nonesense. What Floyd did was much worse.

He hoodwinked and defrauded a naive public into sponsoring his system of lies and legal posturing, to save his skin, because he calculated that it was much more personally expedient to continue the farce to keep his "achievments and earnings" in tact, than it was to become a real hero of the sport by exposing the omerta that has poisoned it and demolished its credibility. And he even had the gall to be a complice on a proxy basis, in hacking into a lab's sensitive data in order to "discredit" the only body here actually working for the right cause. His was the cowardly option. And because of FLandis' cowardlyness, countless more athletes will continue to seek out drugs to enhance their results, to say nothing of the disgusting move he allowed his lawyer to make against Lemond, of which the potential results upon the later's mental stability are far more heneous than the physical risks a dealer exposes to his clients: simply because predicated upon an innocent to inflict harm and in the most nefarious of ways against one who in no way sough to have an extremely delicate (and painful) private matter exposed to the public.

Whereas Joe offered a product to the willing in a system, professional sports, that is without scrupples and where hypocrisy reigns supreme. Those who sought Joe's products are as much to blame as Joe is for selling them. Joe was a mere tool, whose actions did no more than contribute to an allready mortally wounded body. FLandis did much more, by actually sustaining the system through his carefully orchestrated attempt at discrediting the lab which and trying to silence those who actually are trying to dismantal the machine that really inflicts the lethal strikes.

 

[beroepsrenner]

I guess joe is just unlucky.
There is an endless list of high profile cyclists I know of from the last 30 years who managed to get through their whole carreers without being detected, some of whom now hold positions within the sport.

 

[flicker]

I think it good not to hate Floyd and Joe as they are about to reap what they have sown. I bought Floyds' book during the trial, knowing the funds would be used in his defense. Now I am sure Floyd is as dirty as sin, I don't feel ripped off for the $23 it cost for the book. I actually find his book has made good kindling for my fireplace......

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I guess Joe is just unlucky.
There is an endless list of high profile cyclists I know of from the last 30 years who managed to get through their whole careers without being detected, some of whom now hold positions within the sport.

Great to see you back Beroepsrenner. Your candor and cycling wisdom is most welcome on this troubling issue.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I think it good not to hate Floyd and Joe as they are about to reap what they have sown. I bought Floyds' book during the trial, knowing the funds would be used in his defense. Now I am sure Floyd is as dirty as sin, I don't feel ripped off for the $23 it cost for the book. I actually find his book has made good kindling for my fireplace......

You did get ripped off for the book though, I got it for $5.99.

 

[Anonymous]

Nothing will come of the eposino.com buyers unless they were buying enough to resell to others. Email communications should have been encrypted using a service like hushmail, put through an anonymous remailer, or whatever. Money transfers do not require ID for the amounts of money that was likely involved. The information needed to pick up the money can be transmitted via email. The feds are unlikely to track down who rented a PO box for a $300 purchase, especially when the purchaser can claim he never ordered what was delivered. To prevent that defense, the police like to catch the target in the act of accepting or picking up the package. No possibility of that now.

Since there is not much incentive to find the clients, the USADA won't get the information it needs to charge anyone. The most Joe probably has are shipping addresses, the names on which may be fake or inaccurate.

The people who should be worried are those who Joe dealt with in person, but Leogrande may prove to be the extent of that.

this might prove true...or really might not...I work for the postal service, and believe me, postal inspectors via po boxes and that sort of stuff, or addresses...well, they are very specific...even a fake name listed to a box or home, if it is picked up,even just left with a confirmation you are nailed...guess it depends on the mailer and what service joe used...if it was USPS, the inspectors love this sorta of stuff...they go outta their way to feel big time with feds via drug mailings...

 

[BroDeal]

this might prove true...or really might not...I work for the postal service, and believe me, postal inspectors via po boxes and that sort of stuff, or addresses...well, they are very specific...even a fake name listed to a box or home, if it is picked up,even just left with a confirmation you are nailed...guess it depends on the mailer and what service joe used...if it was USPS, the inspectors love this sorta of stuff...they go outta their way to feel big time with feds via drug mailings...

I think most people like to use UPS or something other than the USPS. They like a PO box where they have 24 hour access, thinking that if they pop in at 2:00 am there will be less chance the police will be waiting to catch them in the act of picking up the package. Not sure if that is true. It seems to me that once the police are willing to do a controlled delivery then you are probably screwed no matter when you pick up your package. Careful people would use a different PO box and email addy for every shipment, so that if the source was caught there would not be a record of one person buying a lot of product.

 

[Anonymous]

You might be right...of course, I have no idea at all if it were UPS or FED EX...via his customers and their future safety, they had only better hope it was not USPS is all I mean...I have seen postal inspectors go after illegal absinth from czech republic...let alone a fed thing via these sorta things....they eat this sorta crap for breakfast...but, again, god knows what service he used...they will be much safer if it were not USPS is all I am saying...the USPS inspectors def. go out of their way if there is any sort of fed drug charge...

 

[Epicycle]

I guess joe is just unlucky.
There is an endless list of high profile cyclists I know of from the last 30 years who managed to get through their whole carreers without being detected, some of whom now hold positions within the sport.

The difference with Joe is that if he were eposino.com then he made a relatively big deal of publicizing his venture. People throughout cycling knew about the website and discussed it on message boards. He wasn't attempting to get by without detection, he was making a very public display of what he was doing.

 

[BroDeal]

You might be right...of course, I have no idea at all if it were UPS or FED EX...via his customers and their future safety, they had only better hope it was not USPS is all I mean...I have seen postal inspectors go after illegal absinth from czech republic...let alone a fed thing via these sorta things....they eat this sorta crap for breakfast...but, again, god knows what service he used...they will be much safer if it were not USPS is all I am saying...the USPS inspectors def. go out of their way if there is any sort of fed drug charge...

I think the key is that this is in the past. All that might exist is some records about what was shipped where. I guess there could be fingerprints on paperwork for money transfers. Is it worth the effort and the budget to track down a few shmucks who bought $400 worth of EPO? I don't know, but I suspect that, unless the feds intended to it as a publicity stunt to demonstrate that end buyers were at risk, the feds would not do it. They would have to worry about people saying they got a strange package they did not order and threw it away.

 

[Anonymous]

I think the key is that this is in the past. All that might exist is some records about what was shipped where. I guess there could be fingerprints on paperwork for money transfers. Is it worth the effort and the budget to track down a few shmucks who bought $400 worth of EPO? I don't know, but I suspect that, unless the feds intended to it as a publicity stunt to demonstrate that end buyers were at risk, the feds would not do it. They would have to worry about people saying they got a strange package they did not order and threw it away.

No offence, but if it is/was via usps you would be very wrong there...postal inspectors justify their jobs via this sorta thing....I see it all the time...going back in time for 400 bucks via a recent fed case? no problem at all...they go far beyond for far less..

 

[BroDeal]

No offence, but if it is/was via usps you would be very wrong there...postal inspectors justify their jobs via this sorta thing....I see it all the time...going back in time for 400 bucks via a recent fed case? no problem at all...they go far beyond for far less..

We'll wait and see how many of the 187 get busted. My bet is on zero small buyers.

Heck, where is the criminal case against Leogrande. They have pics of him with the drugs. If the Leogrande case is anything to go by, there may be clear evidence beyond what you would expect a carefully run operation to have. Leogrande evidently sent snail mail for his order request.

 

[Prodigy]

I doubt all these complicated methods were used to hide addresses. It was probably a straight forward credit card job. There is probably a long list of numbers from around the world, but given EPO is not illegal to possess in many countries and there is no big problem with it, the authorities won't bother with it.

 

[Anonymous]

We'll wait and see how many of the 187 get busted. My bet is on zero small buyers.

Heck, where is the criminal case against Leogrande. They have pics of him with the drugs. If the Leogrande case is anything to go by, there may be clear evidence beyond what you would expect a carefully run operation to have. Leogrande evidently sent snail mail for his order request.

you may well be right...guess it depends on what they really want to bust...