Kimmage unleashes hell, counter-sues Verbruggen & McQuaid

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 7, 2010
1,247
0
0
If that is in fact the case, then Kimmage drawing the authorities attention to the 'fraud' hopefully proves to be fruitful.
Often times in lawsuits reason falls by the wayside and then it becomes a pi55ing contest where the lawyers run the files up based on the emotions of the parties.

I am all for PK, but the moral victory has been had. If he forces UCI to show up guns ablaze, it may not be so easy and for sure expensive.
 
Aug 7, 2010
1,247
0
0
thehog said:
His lawyers are working Pro Bono. The 80k is being spent on flying witnesses, requesting documentation etc.

Also this is not civil trial with several appeals. Its a submission to the criminal court. Its not Kimmidge vs UCI.

Do you get it?

The pro bono thing is a pleasant surprise, but for how long.

Having been on the 5hit end of a few lawsuits, hindsight often, but not always, proves that turning the page on things is a cheaper and better option.

And yes, I get it. Save your sarcasm for more useful endeavors as they become available.

The title of this thread should reflect the true nature of the action.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Fortyninefourteen said:
If that is in fact the case, then Kimmage drawing the authorities attention to the 'fraud' hopefully proves to be fruitful.
Often times in lawsuits reason falls by the wayside and then it becomes a pi55ing contest where the lawyers run the files up based on the emotions of the parties.

I am all for PK, but the moral victory has been had. If he forces UCI to show up guns ablaze, it may not be so easy and for sure expensive.

He is not looking for the 'moral victory'.
Indeed he said he was relieved that they had suspended the action against him - he could quite rightly have opened a nice bottle of wine and thought "I am done".

But the clowns are still there - so, he has decided that the moral victory was not what people wanted, or contributed to - and that the sport still had not moved forward.
This action does that.
 
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
This is first and foremost about creating a public platform to air the dirt. The major cycling media have not done so to any degree, USADA scope was restricted, existing riders Omerta continues, etc. And individual ex riders and Kimmage himself have been picked off one by one.

The action PK has taken provides an opportunity to bring everything out publicly on HIS terms. And create much broader awareness than what we've seen to date. Whether he wins or loses a small swiss court case/police investigation or not is beside the point.

And to some of our USA friends. Forget the settlement. That only adds insult to injury. This one you cannot buy.
 
BroDeal said:
Hopefully news of this will cause more people to donate to the Kimmage fund.

Also hopefully this thread won't be deleted by CN mangement like the other Kimmage thread was.

Well I just doubled my previous donation, this is exactly what I'd hoped Paul would do in response to the cowardly non-withdrawal withdrawal of the 'Scumbags' action against him; but obviously it was his call.

Still supporting you 100% Paul !
 
Mar 26, 2009
342
0
0
Fortyninefourteen said:
If that is in fact the case, then Kimmage drawing the authorities attention to the 'fraud' hopefully proves to be fruitful.
Often times in lawsuits reason falls by the wayside and then it becomes a pi55ing contest where the lawyers run the files up based on the emotions of the parties.

I am all for PK, but the moral victory has been had. If he forces UCI to show up guns ablaze, it may not be so easy and for sure expensive.

I'm not sure the UCI has much for guns here. Hein and Pat individually have even less. With all the ammo Kimmage has, and pro bono lawyers, AND a reservoir of popular support that will ensure he will not lose due to lack of funds, I think this might just be a knockout counterpunch.
 
Mar 26, 2009
342
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
First Kimmage is going after HV & PMcQ personally. No UCI funds will be used (wasted) trying to defend themselves.
Effectively, this is now in the hands of the Swiss authorities to pursue.

Regardless, the UCI does not have major funds - but I would think the 2 old boys have enough stacked away (thanks Nike) but if PK needs more funds I expect he can get way more.

Is this a known fact or an assumption? I'm just asking because in such cases, sometimes, the legal umbrella of the employer can be used to assist employees being sued for things that happened/were said when they were working.

(this would also assume that the UCI would want to step in to help defend Pat and Hein, which is not at all necessarily the case)
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
silverrocket said:
Is this a known fact or an assumption? I'm just asking because in such cases, sometimes, the legal umbrella of the employer can be used to assist employees being sued for things that happened/were said when they were working.

(this would also assume that the UCI would want to step in to help defend Pat and Hein, which is not at all necessarily the case)

If an employee of an organization incurs legal costs to carry out his duties for his employer he is entitled to seek indemnification from the employer for those costs.

You can usually find this provision written into employee contracts.

Hein only holds an honorary position with the UCI. It is ceremonial and he is not an employee.

Also his appointment to the UCI Management Committee is ultra vires the UCI Constitution and is therefore invalid.

Hein would have to look to his Japanese slush fund (I originally wrote sushi) from the keiran boys to meet his costs.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Velodude said:
If an employee of an organization incurs legal costs to carry out his duties for his employer he is entitled to seek indemnification from the employer for those costs.

You can usually find this provision written into employee contracts.

Hein only holds an honorary position with the UCI. It is ceremonial and he is not an employee.

Also his appointment to the UCI Management Committee is ultra vires the UCI Constitution and is therefore invalid.

Hein would have to look to his Japanese slush fund (I originally wrote sushi) from the keiran boys to meet his costs.

Is Pat a UCI employee? I thought President was some other type of position?
 
Dear Wiggo said:
Is Pat a UCI employee? I thought President was some other type of position?

The President of an organization is typically the senior paid employee, and the senior executive position (i.e. an Officer of the company).

In some jurisdictions, there is no formal recognition of 'Chief Executive Officer' for example, though this can be created within the articles of the Corporation.

... can go on, but it gets very boring...

Dave.
 
Mar 12, 2010
545
0
0
Costs for the prosecution, are invariably lower than costs for the defence. Its the perfect counter-attack for Kimmage. Will cost him less of the fund to prosecute McQuaid and Verbruggen than defend their lawsuit.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
silverrocket said:
Is this a known fact or an assumption? I'm just asking because in such cases, sometimes, the legal umbrella of the employer can be used to assist employees being sued for things that happened/were said when they were working.

(this would also assume that the UCI would want to step in to help defend Pat and Hein, which is not at all necessarily the case)

No, I am assuming - and happy to be corrected.

But, just thinking out loud - the defamation would be HV & PMcQ stating PK or Landis are liars - would that not be a personal attack as opposed to on the 'employers' dime?
And - would the management Committee not have to ratify that the statements were said on behalf of UCI as well as allow funds be used?
 
Oct 30, 2012
428
0
0
Strikes me that Kimmage is no idiot, has shown incredible tenacity for a decade, and will have chosen this course in a very considered and intelligent way.
His Genevan "Maximus" I'm presuming will be equally savvy and obviously confident of a successful outcome.

Bring it on!
 
Grandillusion said:
Strikes me that Kimmage is no idiot, has shown incredible tenacity for a decade, and will have chosen this course in a very considered and intelligent way.
His Genevan "Maximus" I'm presuming will be equally savvy and obviously confident of a successful outcome.

Bring it on!

He can't go wrong ... Think about it.

Swiss Plod have to investigate, so they will be interviewing, lots & lots of people, & all without PK having to pay for them to go to meet Plod. At the end of the process, there are a number of possible outcomes:

- Plod decides there are grounds to Prosecute - Result !
- Plod can't substantiate the charges, but uncover other 'interesting' evidence - Result !
- Plod find nothing, but lots of people with interesting stories to tell get interviewed under oath, about things, LA, McQ & VerB had been hoping to keep quiet - Result !
- Regardless, PK gets vindicated !
 
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
keeponrollin said:
He can't go wrong ... Think about it.

Swiss Plod have to investigate, so they will be interviewing, lots & lots of people, & all without PK having to pay for them to go to meet Plod. At the end of the process, there are a number of possible outcomes:

- Plod decides there are grounds to Prosecute - Result !
- Plod can't substantiate the charges, but uncover other 'interesting' evidence - Result !
- Plod find nothing, but lots of people with interesting stories to tell get interviewed under oath, about things, LA, McQ & VerB had been hoping to keep quiet - Result !
- Regardless, PK gets vindicated !

The one thing you forget is that Plod gets paid by sports who are in Switzerland because of the money (taxes, lack of transaction transparency, etc) and because they trust that Plod will look after them when it counts. Which Plod almost always has in the past.
 
Tinman said:
The one thing you forget is that Plod gets paid by sports who are in Switzerland because of the money (taxes, lack of transaction transparency, etc) and because they trust that Plod will look after them when it counts. Which Plod almost always has in the past.

The UCI is a pimple on the ar$e of a flea attached to the Elephant that is Swiss Tax income

They are specifically in Switizerland so they don't have to pay much tax.

You are rather massively overestimating the stature of these guys.
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Is Pat a UCI employee? I thought President was some other type of position?

Article 83 of the UCI constitution provides authority for the UCI Congress to bestow on any person their former position with the UCI "honoris causa".

Honoris Causa means "an award as a mark of esteem".

UCI bestowed on Verbruggen the title in 2005 upon the succession by McQuaid to the UCI head honchoship (so Hein could keep him "honest").

Title does not provide Verbruggen with any entitlements to sit on any UCI decision making bodies.
 
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
keeponrollin said:
The UCI is a pimple on the ar$e of a flea attached to the Elephant that is Swiss Tax income

They are specifically in Switizerland so they don't have to pay much tax.

You are rather massively overestimating the stature of these guys.

I specifically mentioned "sports", not "UCI". Plod will support sports, all of them, including FIFA and IOC. If Plod creates a precedent with UCI, sports will be affected.

Indeed UCI is the pimple. And sports the flea. But there is more to the Elephant than tax income, ie transparency prevention, and long memories of the mahout.
 
Aug 17, 2009
125
0
0
For sure Lemond is quietly involved wrt the 55 exhibits. Will the 28 pages be released to the public at some point? I don't think there is anything preventing Paul from releasing it to the public unless it is against his strategy. We shall wait and see...
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
cathulu said:
For sure Lemond is quietly involved wrt the 55 exhibits. Will the 28 pages be released to the public at some point? I don't think there is anything preventing Paul from releasing it to the public unless it is against his strategy. We shall wait and see...

It is a Swiss prosecution matter and one would expect would not be released to the public.

The unexpected release by USADA of the complete reasoned decision and supporting evidence was a tactical stroke to create media opinions, statements from disgusted eminent past cyclists and forum discussion on the fragility of UCI's position to continue to support Armstrong and refer to CAS.

It worked. UCI read the public mood and folded. Now they are in lock down self preservation mode at the Swiss bunker.
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
1
0
Velodude said:
If an employee of an organization incurs legal costs to carry out his duties for his employer he is entitled to seek indemnification from the employer for those costs.
That's along the line that I was pondering. And could this not be extended to include Hein, as a former UCI employee who is defending himself against allegations made specifically about his conduct while working for the UCI? I suppose that is something that the UCI directors will decide.
 
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
Velodude said:
It is a Swiss prosecution matter and one would expect would not be released to the public.

Is a public release of the information supporting the case not allowed under swiss law or is this your opinion?

Velodude said:
The unexpected release by USADA of the complete reasoned decision and supporting evidence was a tactical stroke to create media opinions, statements from disgusted eminent past cyclists and forum discussion on the fragility of UCI's position to continue to support Armstrong and refer to CAS.

It worked. UCI read the public mood and folded. Now they are in lock down self preservation mode at the Swiss bunker.

You are making the perfect case supporting the release of information. Maybe announce you are releasing, get some more public anticipation and potential proof points ie disgruntled teams/riders/sponsors, and delay release date twice. Tygart read it perfectly.