Kimmage unleashes hell, counter-sues Verbruggen & McQuaid

[Velodude]

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



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.

Just my opinion.

If this is a criminal prosecution, the prospective accused have the right to a fair trial. Releasing all the Kimmage documents for public scrutiny and commentary before a trial, if legally possible, may cause any trial to be aborted and the proceedings dismissed through pre trial publicity causing the release of inadmissable evidence prejudicing a fair trial.

Possibly under Swiss law the future defendants (UCI) have a right to challenge at or before the trial whether the evidence presented satisfies the local rules of evidence.

USADA/LA/UCI was a different matter as LA had abandoned his right to an arbitration hearing. USADA had reached a decision and was under no compulsion to keep the decision details and support confidential.

It may be noted that USADA claimed to have withheld certain facts and evidence that may have a bearing on the Bruyneel (& others?) arbitration.

 

[Lukenwolf]

I hate to be the party pooper here, but this could prove to be a mistake. UCI could instantly re-activate their suit against Kimmage here and outspend him 100 to 1. And then outspend him to defend his counter.
Paul, if you are reading this please stay centered here and do not let the euphoria of the moment guide you into a false sense of advantage. The 80 K will disappear faster than a Jamaican pickpocket, and the goodwill of the believers can only carry this so far. Let the battle be fought by the ones who can afford to. Please.

That's the spirit That's how the Berlin wall fell in 1989. We all said "Oh no, we can't topple our dictator, because the army outguns us 100 to 1. We should leave that to the NATO, they have guns too and can afford it." NO

This sort of mindset is exactly what Vedruggen and Bribery McQuid are relying on. Once things get in motion other supporters for Kimmage will step up - USADA, Pound, Asheden, maybe even some teams. That will amount to a lot more money than Kimmage's current funds. And the defense fund will get more donations, too, now that it is more clear what the money'll be spent on. I for once will add some of my Euro's to it today.

I'd say "Men, to arms!"

 

[Benedict XVI]

I really hope all these conspiracy lovers - Lemond, Kimmage, Flandis, etc. get sued to hell by UCI and by Pat himself, so they finally shut their traps.

How any more simple can it be, goddamnit?
You have evidence of cheating, bribing? - Go to the court.
You don't have any evidence? Then SHUT YOUR MOUTH

 

[Tinman]

I really hope all these conspiracy lovers - Lemond, Kimmage, Flandis, etc. get sued to hell by UCI and by Pat himself, so they finally shut their traps.

How any more simple can it be, goddamnit?
You have evidence of cheating, bribing? - Go to the court.
You don't have any evidence? Then SHUT YOUR MOUTH

Burn at the stake you heretic You're living in the past

Latest news is that Pat suspended his case, Kimmage (with support of Greg) are pursuing their defamation case against Pat, and Floyd cannot be found, has shut his trap for quite some time already.

Oh the times they are changin. Oh and we haven't heard from Pat for quite some time either... Not a scumbag to be heard...

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I really hope all these conspiracy lovers - Lemond, Kimmage, Flandis, etc. get sued to hell by UCI and by Pat himself, so they finally shut their traps.

How any more simple can it be, goddamnit?
You have evidence of cheating, bribing? - Go to the court.
You don't have any evidence? Then SHUT YOUR MOUTH

Finally. Someone supporting Pat McQuaid and Hein Verbruggen. Been a long time coming, pal.

Personally, I love the drama of it all, and wait with baited breath to see the outcome.

If you don't know of Lance's "donations" to the UCI then you had better read up, my man. The evidence is laid out in the USADA documents for starters.

 

[Robert21]

Originally Posted by Tinman

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 ..You are rather massively overestimating the stature of these guys.

And what hope is there of the Swiss legal system robustly investigating the UCI 'flea' when they are happy to turn a blind eye to, or even aid, the 'elephant' that is Swiss money laundering?

There is also the fact that many organisations and companies locate to Switzerland not just becuase of tax breaks, but because the Swiss give them other benefits on the assumption that in the long run their presence there will benefit the Swiss economy. For example, I found out that the private company that I used to work for in Switzerland was given, for free, the land on which they built their premises, plus 'grants' for building and other works. It would not surprise me at all if the Canton had give the UCI the land on which their HQ is built. Bottom line is that the Swiss really want organisations like the UCI to locate in Switzerland and will do a lot to keep them happy.

I also wonder just how robustly the Swiss would investigate the UCI, given that such an action might be seen as 'sending the wrong signals' to all those other organisations who locate in Switzerland because, quite apart from the financial incentives, this puts them more-or-less above scrutiny.

Still, let's hope!

 

[Dear Wiggo]

For example, I found out that the private company that I used to work for in Switzerland was given, for free, the land on which they built their premises, plus 'grants' for building and other works.

Just to clarify: given for free - does this mean title to the land? So if things were bad they could sell the buildings and the land?

Coz that is outstanding generosity.

And adds incredible weight to your argument that Switzerland are more likely to extend protectionist attitudes toward what they consider their "own".

 

[Fidolix]

Candy for the clinic boys, must be the happiest day of your lives.

Only problem is, the Swiss court haven´t started anything yet, and it is far from certain that the court considers there is evidence or implications enough to start an investigation, even less chance of starting a criminal case out of it all.
It's not USADA or related court, but a civilian criminal court case, huge difference between the two, and it take a harder foundation of evidence to proceed. Just saying.

 

[Robert21]

Just to clarify: given for free - does this mean title to the land? So if things were bad they could sell the buildings and the land?

Coz that is outstanding generosity.

And adds incredible weight to your argument that Switzerland are more likely to extend protectionist attitudes toward what they consider their "own".

I never saw any deed or similar, just a confidential report that noted the contributions the local Canton had made to the business. It could be that legal title to the land would revert back to the Canton if the company withdrew, so that a ground rent would become payable (or an option to buy the land might be offered) should anyone buy the buildings that the company had built. Even so, given the cost of buying land in Switzerland (and this was a large, prime location site in the middle of an important town) being given land free of rent or purchase costs is a huge incentive.

I always wondered if the local tax payers knew of these sort of arrangements as, despite perceptions, the Swiss do end up paying quite a lot of taxes, with everyone from the Canton to the local churches all taking a cut. Perhaps more significantly the Swiss seem to get little back in return, with Switzerland not even having a European-style health service. In Switzerland all health cover is paid for via expensive private insurance policies, which for many people only really cover serious illnesses requiring hospitalisation, with anything costing (typically) less than 2000 Swiss francs being paid for in full by the patient. Many Swiss travel to France to get medical care, especially dentistry, lab tests and so forth.

Perhaps even more than the US, Switzerland seems to be focused on doing whatever serves the needs of 'business', rather than the people who live there.

 

[sylvanus]

Thinks its time for all of us to support Kimmage - sure he's no saint (like all of us) but he's doing great work here. Paul, if you're reading this then well done - I've contributed to your fund twice and will do so again now. Remember this may be a long haul and will be as much about PR as law. Important you build a coalition of supporters and helpers who stand alongside you publicly. Good luck!

 

[mountainrman]

In contributing to the Kimmage fund, I do not think I signed up for this!
Agressive rather than defensive action.

Kimmage is undoubtedly a hothead who shoots his mouth off which is how he gets himself into trouble at times: but the fact that two sources Hamilton and Landis both stated the same hearsay - that LA stated that he had sent money to make false tests go away should be enough to protect him from libel actions as a result of justifiable journalism that the two dummies have levelled against him. So I was confident with enough backing and sabre rattling he could win.

But I think he should confine himself to battles that he knows he can win...

A criminal action is my view unlikely to succeed, because the evidential levels are too high.

There is a world of difference between civil "balance of probability" in which showing a smoking gun, and a good motive can be enough to win , and "beyond reasonable doubt" in which it is necessary to show that (for example) tweedledum and tweedledee took the money specifically to cover up a positive reading for example, by some document or communication that confirms that is what they believed the money was for. Circumstantial is not enough, and I suspect that is all he has.

The two have demonstrated they are incompetent, but sadly incompetence is not a crime.

Throwing a lot of mud, and hoping some will stick is not sufficient for a criminal action, and may even be regarded as vexatious.

And that may have unintended consequences later - used as further demonstration of Kimmage acting in "bad faith" against the terrible twins.

I want Kimmage to win, and the disgraceful duo to be brought down a few pegs, but to do that he cannot afford to aim to high and miss.

If the pathetic pair win this libel action it will signal an era of restraint in journalism which cycling cannot afford. The crooks need outing, the evidence needs airing, and to do that reasonable journalism needs defending.

It will be interesting to know if evidence presented in a swiss criminal hearing (if it gets that far) is public domain information protected by privelege, (as for example dock statements are in the UK) ie it is a way for Kimmage to get all sorts of stuff into the public domain without fear of any civil repurcussions. But even if so, he has to get the case to be heard first.

 

[Benedict XVI]

Finally. Someone supporting Pat McQuaid and Hein Verbruggen. Been a long time coming, pal.

Personally, I love the drama of it all, and wait with baited breath to see the outcome.

If you don't know of Lance's "donations" to the UCI then you had better read up, my man. The evidence is laid out in the USADA documents for starters.

I never read it, and don't plan to. If they have enough evidence they should sue Pat and Hein, then. Why this attntion-whoring s**t storm? I just don't like loudmouths

 

[happytramp]

A criminal action is my view unlikely to succeed, because the evidential levels are too high.

You're right but that's not really the point. Kimmage just wants enough dirt to come out during the process that it makes their position as heads of the UCI untenable. Thus starting the first steps in effecting real change in the sport.

 

[Cramps]

A criminal action is my view unlikely to succeed, because the evidential levels are too high.

A fraud case might be complicated indeed. But what about defamation? Unfortunately, I'm only able to rely on wikipedia here concerning defamation laws in Switzerland: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation#Switzerland

Intentionally seeking to run the reputation of another? CHECK.
Knows the falsity of accusation? Well, there it gets interesting...!

Maybe someone here actually knows something about defamation in Switzerland....

 

[Lukenwolf]

I never read it, and don't plan to. If they have enough evidence they should sue Pat and Hein, then. Why this attntion-whoring s**t storm? I just don't like loudmouths

Now there's a fittingly selected username if I ever saw one. A man, who heads an organization that resisted change for two thousand years, lives in the past and preaches water, while drinking wine.

 

[mountainrman]

You're right but that's not really the point. Kimmage just wants enough dirt to come out during the process that it makes their position as heads of the UCI untenable. Thus starting the first steps in effecting real change in the sport.

It would be interesting to know what Kimmage would view as success eg the outcome of losing the libel action provided the disgraceful duo are kicked out of UCI.

My worry is he risks losing the libel action if he is accused of acting in a generally vexatious manner towards them, and they use the fact of a failed criminal accusation (TBD of course) as further evidence of Kimmages long term intent to smear them.

 

[ebandit]

?

I never read it, and don't plan to. If they have enough evidence they should sue Pat and Hein, then. Why this attntion-whoring s**t storm? I just don't like loudmouths

seems as though your talking loudest of all............or did i misinterpret your
'THEN SHUT YOUR MOUTH etc'

for too long mr v / fat pat have deflected attention blaming everyone else

they deserve some heat

 

[mountainrman]

A fraud case might be complicated indeed. But what about defamation? Unfortunately, I'm only able to rely on wikipedia here concerning defamation laws in Switzerland: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation#Switzerland

Intentionally seeking to run the reputation of another? CHECK.
Knows the falsity of accusation? Well, there it gets interesting...!

Maybe someone here actually knows something about defamation in Switzerland....

Sadly the only thing I know about Swiss defamatin law so far, is it is possible for someone who considers themselves defamed to win such a hearing ex partite without even informing the party allegedly defaming, or opportunity to present the eveidence against them, because that is what they did to Landis.

One outcome I would love to see (sounds bizarre at first) is something that has happened a few times in UK libel and defamation hearings .

Which is Kimmage to lose, then the courts to award own costs against the terrible twins, and damages of one dollar only.

Which is basically saying "yes you win on a technicality, because maybe he did not have enough evidence - but hey - your reputation is so low it is worthless, so the most it can be damaged is one dollar!" It is even more damning than if Kimmage wins, since it actually puts a value on the disgusting duos reputation - it would be a court stating in black and white their reputation is worthless!".

 

[zebedee]

Mountainman, don't you think any hot-headedness will be tempered by the professional legal advice Kimmage is now presumably receiving?

 

[Benotti69]

Candy for the clinic boys, must be the happiest day of your lives.

Only problem is, the Swiss court haven´t started anything yet, and it is far from certain that the court considers there is evidence or implications enough to start an investigation, even less chance of starting a criminal case out of it all.
It's not USADA or related court, but a civilian criminal court case, huge difference between the two, and it take a harder foundation of evidence to proceed. Just saying.

Juat saying you are bitter perchance and have no wish for a cleaner sport, which starts with ridding the Interantional Federation of those who are corrupt.

 

[Benotti69]

Sadly the only thing I know about Swiss defamatin law so far, is it is possible for someone who considers themselves defamed to win such a hearing ex partite without even informing the party allegedly defaming, or opportunity to present the eveidence against them, because that is what they did to Landis.

One outcome I would love to see (sounds bizarre at first) is something that has happened a few times in UK libel and defamation hearings .

Which is Kimmage to lose, then the courts to award own costs against the terrible twins, and damages of one dollar only.

Which is basically saying "yes you win on a technicality, because maybe he did not have enough evidence - but hey - your reputation is so low it is worthless, so the most it can be damaged is one dollar!" It is even more damning than if Kimmage wins, since it actually puts a value on the disgusting duos reputation - stating their reputation is worthless!"

You obviously know little according to your posting history. That you have been trying to chip away at USADA and now when that failed having a go at Kimmage.

You are failing in disguising your trolling.

 

[Cramps]

Does anyone know of specific defaming quotes made against Kimmage by either McQuaid or Verbruggen?

 

[RichWalk]

“It’s justice for the kids who came into the sport and thought they had a chance of achieving their dreams but ended up in coffins; justice for all the kids who wanted to achieve their dreams without doping and were forced out of the sport because they didn’t have a shot and justice for those that were left with a choice, cheat or be cheated.”

Very poignant statement form Kimmage, seems his passion has really been arroused by these two clowns, appears his stand point is a moral not financial one. Couldnt happen to two nicer blokes..........

 

[Dear Wiggo]

“It’s justice for the kids who came into the sport and thought they had a chance of achieving their dreams but ended up in coffins; justice for all the kids who wanted to achieve their dreams without doping and were forced out of the sport because they didn’t have a shot and justice for those that were left with a choice, cheat or be cheated.”

Very poignant statement form Kimmage, seems his passion has really been arroused by these two clowns, appears his stand point is a moral not financial one. Couldnt happen to two nicer blokes..........

Kimmage has had a few months of no work to really polish his delivery I reckon - lots of self-editing until the opportunity presents itself.

Having read his book and heard the disappointment in his voice ever since, I am sincerely happy for the guy to have a chance to do something that makes him feel worthwhile.

 

[mountainrman]

Does anyone know of specific defaming quotes made against Kimmage by either McQuaid or Verbruggen?

The dispute essentially centres on Kimmage repeating statements of Landis that Armstrong had said to him he had sent money for them to cover up positive tests - ie an allegation of corruption.

The duo sued Kimmage and Landis (noticeably not the publications in which the allegations were made - which is below the belt). Hamilton confirmed as much , so Kimmage can now point to two sources as therefore being responsible journalism in public interest. How "responsible journalism" and "public interest" figures as a defence in swiss defamation, I do not know.