i've felt all along that the legal angle seems to be leaning toward racketeering--even if it started as a probe into distribution and use of controlled substances. that feeling is even stronger now after reading this latest article.
i never felt this was misuse of public funds case. as for misusing private funds (trek, discovery, radio shack etc), the case would not be investigated and brought by a federal agency--it would be a matter of state law. i'm not sure conversion would lie anyway for the bike-sales-for-drugs aspect--unless the bikes were lent to the team and expected to be returned after a given amount of time. if the bikes were given free and clear, the bikes where theirs to do with as they pleased. the only legal angles would be tax and insurance fraud on the part of trek and the team.
since the bikes where likely insured, if they were sold and then claimed on the insurance, the insurance company could sue for fraud and possibly press charges for larceny by trick. but again that would be a state law case and would not involve the feds.
if the "stolen" bikes were reported for tax purposes as losses, then tax fraud has been committed. it would also be tax fraud if they were claiming their doping products, paraphernalia, and medical staff as medical expense items. i seriously doubt they were offsetting by listing the revenue from the "stolen" bikes as miscellaneous revenues. tax fraud is a federal crime.
answers to some questions i saw in the thread:
hincappie's fifth amendment right allows him to refuse to answer anything for as long as he wishes to not answer anything. he can say "i don't recall" when asked if he ever transfused or took epo or saw anyone else doing so. the risk of perjury will be very small because it is almost impossible to prove what someone does or does not recall at any given moment (unlike someone saying flat out, "i did not do it").
hamilton's statement that he will only answer questions if subpoenaed indicates that he won't cooperate with the investigation, since subpoenas compel participation at legal proceedings, and legal proceedings follow investigations. he could be prosecuted for obstructing justice if he doesn't help with the investigation, however--except that he has the right not to provide evidence that incriminates himself in any way.
foreign cyclists can be subpoenaed and prosecuted in the US if they have committed a crime here or have facilitated the commission of crime here from abroad. plus there are laws that allow for prosecution of multinational criminal rings, which is where i feel this case is headed. whether they will brought to stand trial and serve their convictions here will depend upon the applicable extradition treaties and their countries' willingness to extradite them.
this case has the makings to be huge--it will make BALCO look quaint. i wouldn't doubt that someone in baseball prodded the fda to investigate this. baseball is america's sport, and it had to rankle some very rich and powerful people, who were called before congressional hearings regarding doping in baseball, that armstong, who has political aspirations, was prancing around like king of the world.
what i am most interested in is seeing how dirty and complicit livestrong is in all this. what better front could one wish for an international doping ring that relies predominantly on cancer meds, than a cancer foundation?
wasn't lance a part owner of the teams? i thought i remembered something along those lines.
ps: polish--the transfusing operation described for postal wasn't "rinky dink," it was pretty smart actually. it was small scale, so it easy to keep under wraps and lessen the likelihood of bribery, leaks, and detection. also, with fewer "clients" it was easier to keep track of the blood and avoid potentially lethal mistakes. most people focus on the economies of scale, but quality is always sacrificed for bigness. with illegal operations, successful criminals who do well, understand the diseconomies of scale.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram