• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Landis threatened?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 11, 2009
2,250
0
0
Visit site
Race Radio said:
Note some key words in that resume

"government investigations"

"became a federal prosecutor in the Northern District of California. For eight years, he investigated and prosecuted a variety of crimes"

"illegal exports...........other types of fraud"

Armstrong is Forked

Also, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Very relevant vis Verbruggen or any other foreigners, including doping officials, whose palms have been greased by Postal or Discovery or Lance's Tailwind biz, etc. Wiki says on that:

"The anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA prohibit:

Issuers, domestic concerns, and any person from making use of interstate commerce corruptly, in furtherance of an offer or payment of anything of value to a foreign official, foreign political party, or candidate for political office, for the purpose of influencing any act of that foreign official in violation of the duty of that official, or to secure any improper advantage in order to obtain or retain business."

"Doctors at government-owned or managed hospitals are also considered to be foreign officials under the FCPA, as is anyone working for a government-owned or managed institution or enterprise. Employees of international organizations such as the United Nations are also considered to be foreign officials under the FCPA. There is no materiality to this act, making it illegal to offer anything of value as a bribe, including cash or non-cash items. The government focuses on the intent of the bribery rather than on the amount."

"Regarding payments to foreign officials, the act draws a distinction between bribery and facilitation or "grease payments", which may be permissible under the FCPA but may still violate local laws. The primary distinction is that grease payments are made to an official to expedite his performance of the duties he is already bound to perform. Payments to foreign officials may be legal under the FCPA if the payments are permitted under the written laws of the host country."

No more dealing with patsies at the UCI. Welcome to the real world.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
Parrot23 said:
Also, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Very relevant vis Verbruggen or any other foreigners, including doping officials, whose palms have been greased by Postal or Discovery or Lance's Tailwind biz, etc. Wiki says on that:

"The anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA prohibit:

Issuers, domestic concerns, and any person from making use of interstate commerce corruptly, in furtherance of an offer or payment of anything of value to a foreign official, foreign political party, or candidate for political office, for the purpose of influencing any act of that foreign official in violation of the duty of that official, or to secure any improper advantage in order to obtain or retain business."

"Doctors at government-owned or managed hospitals are also considered to be foreign officials under the FCPA, as is anyone working for a government-owned or managed institution or enterprise. Employees of international organizations such as the United Nations are also considered to be foreign officials under the FCPA. There is no materiality to this act, making it illegal to offer anything of value as a bribe, including cash or non-cash items. The government focuses on the intent of the bribery rather than on the amount."

"Regarding payments to foreign officials, the act draws a distinction between bribery and facilitation or "grease payments", which may be permissible under the FCPA but may still violate local laws. The primary distinction is that grease payments are made to an official to expedite his performance of the duties he is already bound to perform. Payments to foreign officials may be legal under the FCPA if the payments are permitted under the written laws of the host country.

This was the first thing that I thought of as well. For my job I have to go through annual "Training" for FCPA and sign a document stating that I understand it. Just a way to protect my company and toss me under the bus if I do anything stupid.

Add in Tax evasion, fraud, possession, distribution....the list is endless. If none of that works then Lemond has a slam dunk case for tortious interference.
 
I doubt an attorney like Cunningham would waste his time if he did not think this was a worthwhile endeavor. It's not as though an attorney of that stature is hurting for clients.

It's still absolutely fascinating that despite all the claims Landis has made, neither Lance nor Levi nor Zabriskie nor Bruyneel, etc., etc. has sued him for slander.
 
May 26, 2009
377
0
0
Visit site
python said:
i find it an interesting parallel: some named by flandis run for a corporate cover despite having plentiful personal resources.

...armstrong gets a corporate radioshack legal counsel to release some emails
...and verbruggen who hasn't headed the uci for years now gets the uci legal counsel to sent threatening letters.

Verbruggen was accused of criminal behavior in his capacity as a UCI official, wasn't he? In which case, why would it not be entirely correct for the UCI legal counsel to deal with flandis?
 
Moose McKnuckles said:
I doubt an attorney like Cunningham would waste his time if he did not think this was a worthwhile endeavor. It's not as though an attorney of that stature is hurting for clients.

It's still absolutely fascinating that despite all the claims Landis has made, neither Lance nor Levi nor Zabriskie nor Bruyneel, etc., etc. has sued him for slander.

sue Landis for what? Old cycling jerseys and chamois cream?

he doesn't even have a pot to **** in:eek:
 
Dec 4, 2009
31
0
0
Visit site
As I understand it, if Lance sues FL then Floyd will be able to require testimony from Kristen. That might not be good for LA because some believe that under oath Kristen would be telling the truth... hmmmm?
 
More emails: In a series of e-mails sent to sponsors and sports officials, Landis also alleged Armstrong taught others how to beat the system and paid the former president of the International Cycling Union to keep a failed test quiet.
 
Moose McKnuckles said:
Not necessarily testimony from Kristen, but he'd be entitled to discovery.

But what's keeping Kristen from lying? I mean if she says no, who's going to come out and say Kristen is lying. It's just easier to say "No, I didn't see anything" just as all the witnesses deposed in the SCA case did. Look what happened to Frankie after he lied in his deposition.:rolleyes:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Red Lobster said:
That is also a $600+/hr lawyer whose retainer has to be at least $50k. It is curious . . . Being bankrolled or else Leo is going pro bono to get the highest profile action.

Maybe pro bono is what's happening here and wouldn't that be something. Perhaps LA will spend a few million to defend himself against Floyd who is being represented by an extremely competent attorney.... possibly for free.

From his resume, "Leo was honored by the California Lawyer as an attorney of the year in 2006 for his pro bono efforts."
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
Visit site
Race Radio said:
Note some key words in that resume

"government investigations"

"became a federal prosecutor in the Northern District of California. For eight years, he investigated and prosecuted a variety of crimes"

"illegal exports...........other types of fraud"

Armstrong is Forked

The keywords that jumped out at me were "RICO"...

So, if this team is assisting Floyd to cooperate with Novitsky, adding legal horsepower to the effort, I agree with your assessment: Armstrong is sure forked.

Just thinking, as Leo is a former US Federal Prosecutor, and bringing down big targets is his game. Throwing his back into this effort, could be just for lawyer sport. I wonder is he has any ties with Novitsky? Been in the same neck of the woods for some time now.

Also, for what its worth, Wilson has an Austin office.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
While little was made public one would assume the Lemond's crack legal team did a good job of uncovering evidence of Armstrong's various activities during his recent legal case.

Cunningham has spent the last year gathering evidence on Armstrong. I am sure he will be a great asset to Novitsky. It is also convenient that Jeff and Leo were both Federal Prosecutors in the same district.

Armstrong is Fooked
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
La Vie Claire said:
But what's keeping Kristen from lying? I mean if she says no, who's going to come out and say Kristen is lying. It's just easier to say "No, I didn't see anything" just as all the witnesses deposed in the SCA case did. Look what happened to Frankie after he lied in his deposition.:rolleyes:
she already indicated what she'll do - and it's not refusing to testify or lying per se - 'i don't recall' - a standard stonewalling tactic.

the problem for her though might be that if that tactic worked in the trek vs. lemond case it will likely not work IF novitzky believes she has the information but does not cooperate. by law she can take the 5th on the stand as a witness but not refuse questioning of the federal investigator.

provided novitzky does his home work before calling her, he can catch her in the threat of perjury.

@ urwelcome

verbruggen has not been in any official capacity with the uci since 2008. given the seriousness of the allegations, they ought to investigate the charge as the uci rules demand in stead of throwing their blind support behind a former employee.
 
Apr 29, 2010
1,059
1
0
Visit site
python said:
she already indicated what she'll do - and it's not refusing to testify or lying per se - 'i don't recall' - a standard stonewalling tactic.

So I take it the David Walsh report that Kristen is cooperating is not really true? I missed something here.
 
Apr 9, 2009
976
0
0
Visit site
Rip:30 said:
So I take it the David Walsh report that Kristen is cooperating is not really true? I missed something here.

There are conflicting reports. An initial story said she was cooperating; a subsequent story said she did not recall the events related by Landis. Regardless, it's doubtful we're going to know the real story of what is going on with the investigation for a while. If Kristin is cooperating, the feds aren't going to hold a press conference announcing that fact.
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
Visit site
python said:
she already indicated what she'll do - and it's not refusing to testify or lying per se - 'i don't recall' - a standard stonewalling tactic.

the problem for her though might be that if that tactic worked in the trek vs. lemond case it will likely not work IF novitzky believes she has the information but does not cooperate. by law she can take the 5th on the stand as a witness but not refuse questioning of the federal investigator.

provided novitzky does his home work before calling her, he can catch her in the threat of perjury.

@ urwelcome

verbruggen has not been in any official capacity with the uci since 2008. given the seriousness of the allegations, they ought to investigate the charge as the uci rules demand in stead of throwing their blind support behind a former employee.

Stating in a media report "I don't recall" is quite different than stating it during an interview with authorities, in a deposition, etc.

Taking the 5th is an adverse inference. Charging her with a crime not only lifts spousal privilege, it gives them something to negotiate, ie, cooperation. There is not any stonewalling.

Whether Verbruggen has any capacity still (though ongoing as part of Management Committee, read puppet master) is not the issue. His role, during the time at which the allegations took place, is the material aspect. Thus, Verbiest forwarding the threat email/letter to Landis.

The equation on the Landis side of the line is stacking up in an ominous fashion.
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Visit site
Funny $hit!

Armstrong has said he doesn't plan to sue Landis, whose accusations became public in a leaked e-mail that described the U.S. Postal Service cycling team, which Armstrong led to record-breaking Tour de France victories, as a sordid pit of corruption.

Jeez, thanks for not suing me a$shole.

Wilson Sonsini attorney Jamie DiBoise asked Kristin Armstrong if she had seen her ex-husband use performance-enhancing drugs, and she declined to answer on the advice of her attorney, Tim Herman, who also has represented Lance Armstrong.

I guess that's a yes fanboys!

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/m...al_legal_challenges.html?page=1#ixzz0qEfiQ6lS
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Visit site
They're not suicidal.

Moose McKnuckles said:
I doubt an attorney like Cunningham would waste his time if he did not think this was a worthwhile endeavor. It's not as though an attorney of that stature is hurting for clients.

It's still absolutely fascinating that despite all the claims Landis has made, neither Lance nor Levi nor Zabriskie nor Bruyneel, etc., etc. has sued him for slander.

The truth is a complete defense to slander.

These clowns are running for their lives.
 
Jul 17, 2009
406
0
0
Visit site
buckwheat said:
Wilson Sonsini attorney Jamie DiBoise asked Kristin Armstrong if she had seen her ex-husband use performance-enhancing drugs, and she declined to answer on the advice of her attorney, Tim Herman, who also has represented Lance Armstrong.

I guess that's a yes fanboys!

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/m...al_legal_challenges.html?page=1#ixzz0qEfiQ6lS

Hahahahah. You have been the victim of media spin. Why would Kristin answer that question in a case about Greg Lemond's contractual agreement with Trek? You are a puppet.
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
Visit site
buckwheat said:
The truth is a complete defense to slander.

And yet, curiously, not one of them has served Mr. Landis with papers after he globally and provocatively accused them of taking bribes, cheating and then begging them to sue...

So telling... so telling.
 

TRENDING THREADS