Lemond/Trek new thread

[sherer]

that's one an example of one athlete. Hardly a massive cover up from the UCI of the whole drugs issue.

 

[Race Radio]

that's one an example of one athlete. Hardly a massive cover up from the UCI of the whole drugs issue.

No offense, but have you been living in a cave?

 

[thehog]

has this been posted?

http://road.cc/content/news/11812-l...-date-judge-urges-greg-lemond-and-trek-settle

 

[Ex-trackie]

One has to wonder if the judge could be experiencing pressure to encourage a settlement.

 

[thehog]

One has to wonder if the judge could be experiencing pressure to encourage a settlement.

Its normal. The judicial system always encourage arbitration and or settlement rather than lengthy, expensive court cases. Well they prefer to keep most cases out of court because there is simply not enough courts in the US to keep up with all of the cases.

This is normal. If LeMond and Trek can't agree then it goes to court which I think LeMond really really wants to do even if he loses he just wants to get the "dirt"into the public domain.

 

[elapid]

Not to mention the phantom TUE for steroid.

Lance's HCG was through the roof at the time of his testicular cancer diagnosis (109,000, normal < 0.5). He was tested by the UCI prior to his diagnosis. Why didn't Lance test positive for HCG? UCI coverup? Lance payoff (er, sorry, contribution to the UCI for drug testing equipment)? Note that other athletes have had their testicular cancer diagnosed because of elevated HCG levels on UCI doping tests.

 

[Race Radio]

Trek is screwed.

Yesterday the judge ruled that the only two issues that will be going forward to trial are LeMond's claim that Trek failed to use best efforts and Trek's claim that LeMond violated the moral turpitude clause by talking about doping. No other claims will be going to trial.

The free bike claim and the PTI claim were knocked out. LeMond won on those.

Interestingly, the judge noted in a footnote regarding Trek's sole surviving claim that it had "reservations" regarding its "viability" and invited LeMond's attorneys to file a motion knocking it out as a matter of law when the record is more developed at trial.

The court also footnoted that one of Trek's quotations regarding the law on best efforts was "misleading." Which means intentionality, which is not far from a lie, which is something you don't do to a federal judge. Ouch.

Trek is screwed. For the groupies who wondered why this case was about Armstrong's doping you can now see that it is ALL about Armstrong's doping. The Judge even said that Armstrong should be prepared to be in the courtroom in March and asked if Greg's comments would actually be considered damaging if Armstrong was in fact a doper? This opens the door for Greg to bring in multiple witness to talk about Armstrong's doping.

It is no wonder Trek wants to settle so bad, they cannot win here.

 

[Ex-trackie]

Race Radio, is there a link to yesterday's proceedings that you refer to? I would love to follow this a bit more closely.

And I would LOVE (!!!!) to see the circus of Armstrong in court trying to prove himself clean. Oooo this is going to be very entertaining!!

 

[trompe le monde]

Wow, could it possibly happen, that Armstrong would have to drag his a$$ into a courtroom to try and discredit eye-witness accounts about his epo/blood bag indiscretions?

Would love to see how those sipping the Armstrong kool-aid would spin it if it goes on court record that he did in fact dope. Would it be a US Conspiracy designed strictly in order to 'try and improve US-French relations'? Would the eye-witnesses be tarred as unsuccessful blackmailers, who tried but failed to extract money out of his 'awareness' cause?

Would like this to go to trial, mainly because Lemond's image has unjustly suffered simply because he stated he was disappointed in Armstrong's association with the Italian Doctor Mabuse, Ferrari. Always thought of him as a decent guy, and my opinion of him hasn't changed. If anything, I respect him more for standing up for his convictions by pushing back at the yellow-braceletted armada.

 

[guilder]

This opens the door for Greg to bring in multiple witness to talk about Armstrong's doping.

I think the court has already been there, done that. SCA?
Judge just wants LA's autograph.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I think the court has already been there, done that. SCA?
Judge just wants LA's autograph.

No - the court has not been there already.

It is quite incredible that on another thread you dismiss a factual account of all Lances discretions - including the SCA case - as 'manipulative gossip'.

If you had taken the time to read it you would be aware that the SCA case was a Texas contractual dispute - no judgement was made on the doping questions as once it was established SCA were an insurer then they were obliged to pay the bonus payments.

This case could turn out different however - and LA's autograph may not be worth very much after.

 

[Publicus]

Trek is screwed.

Yesterday the judge ruled that the only two issues that will be going forward to trial are LeMond's claim that Trek failed to use best efforts and Trek's claim that LeMond violated the moral turpitude clause by talking about doping. No other claims will be going to trial.

The free bike claim and the PTI claim were knocked out. LeMond won on those.

Interestingly, the judge noted in a footnote regarding Trek's sole surviving claim that it had "reservations" regarding its "viability" and invited LeMond's attorneys to file a motion knocking it out as a matter of law when the record is more developed at trial.

The court also footnoted that one of Trek's quotations regarding the law on best efforts was "misleading." Which means intentionality, which is not far from a lie, which is something you don't do to a federal judge. Ouch.

Trek is screwed. For the groupies who wondered why this case was about Armstrong's doping you can now see that it is ALL about Armstrong's doping. The Judge even said that Armstrong should be prepared to be in the courtroom in March and asked if Greg's comments would actually be considered damaging if Armstrong was in fact a doper? This opens the door for Greg to bring in multiple witness to talk about Armstrong's doping.

It is no wonder Trek wants to settle so bad, they cannot win here.

Even the threat of this occurring cannot be good for Armstrong's mental preparation and training.

 

[Polish]

SellOut NO!

Greg better not "sellout" and accept an out-of-court settlement!

That would suck big time.

 

[BYOP88]

Greg better not "sellout" and accept an out-of-court settlement!

That would suck big time.

+1

Come on Greg, take the funkers down!!!

 

[Mellow Velo]

I hope someone has the sense to try and have the case adjourned until the end of June!
Live by the legal sword and die by it.

 

[Race Radio]

As much as it would be good it the truth came out I am not sure if a court case would be the way to go.

The fact is Armstrong has done a far better job of spinning the media. This case is a perfect example. There are plenty of groupies that repeat the Armstrong press releases as if they are fact, yet we have seen that they do not stand up in court. Even when Greg wins Armstrong will spin it as Greg is just bitter....and the groupies will eat it up even though it has no basis in reality.

The best thing would be to settle, take the cash, then let the new information make it's way into the public domain.

 

[Race Radio]

As much as it would be good it the truth came out I am not sure if a court case would be the way to go.

The fact is Armstrong has done a far better job of spinning the media. This case is a perfect example. There are plenty of groupies that repeat the Armstrong press releases as if they are fact, yet we have seen that they do not stand up in court. Even when Greg wins Armstrong will spin it as Greg is just bitter....and the groupies will eat it up even though it has no basis in reality.A great example is the SCA case. Once the judge said that the case was about contract law, and there were no provisions in the contract for doping, SCA settled. Of course Armstrong's press releases we all about him being vindicated an this was proof that he did not dope. Despite this being false his groupies ate it up and still repeat it to this day.

The best thing would be to settle, take the cash, then let the new information make it's way into the public domain.

 

[Polish]

The best thing would be to settle, take the cash, then let the new information make it's way into the public domain.

Sounds like "Greg Fanboy" spin to me

If Greg sells-out and settles out-of-court, it will mean 2 things at least:

1) Greg is in it ONLY for himself
2) Lance wins

CourtRoom! CourtRoom! CourtRoom!

I find it disturbing that Greg is even THINKING of an out-of-court PAYOFF

Get Lance on the Stand for crying out loud.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Sounds like "Greg Fanboy" spin to me

If Greg sells-out and settles out-of-court, it will mean 2 things at least:

1) Greg is in it ONLY for himself
2) Lance wins

CourtRoom! CourtRoom! CourtRoom!

I find it disturbing that Greg is even THINKING of an out-of-court PAYOFF

Get Lance on the Stand for crying out loud.

So, if Greg doesn't take the case he "is in it ONLY for himself" - and if he does take the case then I presume he is a "bitter, jealous, hater" who is only out to destroy Lance? Sounds like the guy can't win.

I would like Greg to go all the way with this also - even though he has already 'won' on most of the points against Trek it would be good for him to clear his reputation.

Can anyone explain what 'moral turpitude' is? And is there a guarantee that Lance will have to testify? If not, then taking a settlement and not going to trial would appear to be the smarter option.

 

[Race Radio]

Sounds like "Greg Fanboy" spin to me

If Greg sells-out and settles out-of-court, it will mean 2 things at least:

1) Greg is in it ONLY for himself
2) Lance wins

CourtRoom! CourtRoom! CourtRoom!

I find it disturbing that Greg is even THINKING of an out-of-court PAYOFF

Get Lance on the Stand for crying out loud.

My post was my view on the issue, not Greg's. You can see from the court filings that Trek fought hard for the last year, trying to out spend and intimidate Lemond. Now that the reality has hit I don't see them letting this go to trial, there is just too much for them to lose. Financially they are at risk but more importantly I don't see Armstrong risking his reputation even further. While financially the SCA trial was a win for Armstrong it did huge damage to his reputation. Even his most ardent fanboys had to concede that he doped. I don't see him taking that risk again.

As much as Armstrong has tried to spin this as Greg's obsession with him the reality is his case is about Trek screwing Greg because of a few sentences that reflected what the vast majority of the sports fans thought at the time.

 

[buckwheat]

Even the threat of this occurring cannot be good for Armstrong's mental preparation and training.

You mean when Armstrong uses injections without public scrutiny he's not troubled in the least but when he's questioned about those injections it affects him mentally?

 

[buckwheat]

As much as it would be good it the truth came out I am not sure if a court case would be the way to go.

The fact is Armstrong has done a far better job of spinning the media. This case is a perfect example. There are plenty of groupies that repeat the Armstrong press releases as if they are fact, yet we have seen that they do not stand up in court. Even when Greg wins Armstrong will spin it as Greg is just bitter....and the groupies will eat it up even though it has no basis in reality.A great example is the SCA case. Once the judge said that the case was about contract law, and there were no provisions in the contract for doping, SCA settled. Of course Armstrong's press releases we all about him being vindicated an this was proof that he did not dope. Despite this being false his groupies ate it up and still repeat it to this day.

The best thing would be to settle, take the cash, then let the new information make it's way into the public domain.

Although I think you're right just about all the time in these matters, I have a feeling LeMond's going to object to being muzzled and that will prevent a settlement.

That and the fact that LeMond is still kicking himself about his original retraction which he issued under duress, I don't see him backing down here.

That's what makes this thing so interesting, two maniacs battling it out with Trek in the middle.

In my estimation, the cost of LeMond's silence would be, and should be, immense. Why should he have to shut up? Drugs are still a big problem and LeMond's silence would mean he'd have to end his involvement with Professional Cycling. As one of the legends of the sport he should be able to speak about any issue relating to the sport.

 

[Digger]

Lance in a court of law being questioned by Greg's lawyers who, I assume, are the best that money can buy....happy days!!!

 

[krebs303]

Can anyone explain what 'moral turpitude' is? .

n general terms, a crime of moral turpitude refers to a crime that encompasses a base or vile act. The case law interpreting the term "moral turpitude" is not always consistent. However, the following offenses, whether charged as felonies or misdemeanors, are of the type that have typically been found to be crimes of moral turpitude:

* crimes which involve either an intent to defraud or an intent to steal as an element;

* crimes which involve an element of intentional or reckless infliction of harm to persons or property;

* sex crimes, in which "lewd" intent is an element.

Additionally, felonies and some misdemeanors in which malice is an element are commonly held to be crimes of moral turpitude.

Serious offenses, such as murder, voluntary manslaughter, kidnapping, sexual assault, robbery, buglary, larceny, aggravated assault, prostitution, and even shoplifting have been held to involve moral turpitude.

 

[Polish]

Polish Exclusive!

Check out this leaked video showing some out-of-court negotiations.

Lance & Levi, and Big Greg himself.
Video ends abrubtly - hope Levi is OK

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2QGouUrn5Q
.
.
.