Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession)

[thehog]

It's been said here that Lance spurned a $17M offer from the feds (from the Macur book). I don't think he's afraid of a $100M judgment. Maybe he's afraid of losing a much smaller amount? Maybe Lance's finances are quite a bit more delicate.

I've seen no sign that Lance is a strategic mastermind. Very, very much to the contrary.

The SCA perjury appears to be time barred by the statute of limitations. If he contradicts that, he's not risking anything. Heck, he's already contradicted that on Oprah! Are you aware of any other sworn testimony out there?

Afraid of the unknown. And as many before can attest, the government can fight a legal battle into next century.

They so not have the undertake a risk/reward analysis on the cost of proceedings vs. outcome.

Perjury is so small fry. Like I said, go to family court for a day if you want to see civil perjury.

However when perjury is mixed with intent to defraud and other things it's context takes a much larger proposition.

Lance has a strategy. I wasn't saying he was a mastermind. But he's not doing too badly thus far for a guy who won't let himself be deposed. The QT is the main show. His eyes are on that alone.

 

[spetsa]

In the scheme of things & terms of relevance, SCA means little. He won't depose himself and will settle under a financed deal.

There is no chance to settle if a settlement isn't offered. Do you really think that SCA, with relatively cheap, in house lawyers, will do anything other than go after all the monies plus....?

 

[thehog]

There is no chance to settle if a settlement isn't offered. Do you really think that SCA, with relatively cheap, in house lawyers, will do anything other than go after all the monies plus....?

What's the alternative? He will depose, take the 5th and it will he dragged through the courts for the next 18-24 months. Want to chance it to a court who may see some reason in Armstrong's argument? I wouldn't take that chance.

What's it been now? 8 years.

He'll offer them 8m up front, or thereabouts and they'll take it.

Point I was making if SCA want to drag this out they can. The main game is the QT. That's where it's at.

 

[spetsa]

What's the alternative? He will depose, take the 5th and it will he dragged through the courts for the next 18-24 months. Want to chance it to a court who may see some reason in Armstrong's argument? I wouldn't take that chance.

What's it been now? 8 years.

He'll offer them 8m up front, or thereabouts and they'll take it.

Point I was making if SCA want to drag this out they can. The main game is the QT. That's where it's at.

What court could he possibly go to at this point? Are you saying that if he pleads the fifth, that the arbitration panel will look at it and say, "golly gee, he didn't incriminate himself, so we can't make a ruling."?

 

[thehog]

What court could he possibly go to at this point? Are you saying that if he pleads the fifth, that the arbitration panel will look at it and say, "golly gee, he didn't incriminate himself, so we can't make a ruling."?

The panel can make a ruling, sure.

What then?

 

[spetsa]

The panel can make a ruling, sure.

What then?

If the ruling is reimburse plus costs, he pays.

 

[Kennf1]

There is no chance to settle if a settlement isn't offered. Do you really think that SCA, with relatively cheap, in house lawyers, will do anything other than go after all the monies plus....?

SCA is not using in-house lawyers.

 

[spetsa]

SCA is not using in-house lawyers.

Link? You may be correct.

 

[thehog]

If the ruling is reimburse plus costs, he pays.

Yes a ruling. How does one enforce a ruling if one party refuses to pay or says they don't have the money?

Or party doesn't accept the ruling? They appeal the ruling in a higher court.

Herman the plug will be filing appeals at $0 per day for the next 2 years.

Arbitrators want you to settle. That's why they were created. They encourage you to settle. They exist for no other reason. Not to rule but to bring parties to agreement.

 

[spetsa]

Arbitrators want you to settle. That's why they were created. They encourage you to settle. That's why they exist. Not to rule but to bring parties to agreement.

They must have been behind the scenes here, because I do agree with you, but I highly doubt SCA is going to settle for anything less than what they ask for. As to your point about it already being 8 years...what's another year to them?

 

[Kennf1]

Link? You may be correct.

The lead attorney is Jeffrey Tillotson, with Lynn, Tillotson, Pinker, Cox. Same firm that was involved with the original arbitration.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/comm...st-to-sue-armstrong-after-oprah-interview.ece

 

[spetsa]

The lead attorney is Jeffrey Tillotson, with Lynn, Tillotson, Pinker, Cox. Same firm that was involved with the original arbitration.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/comm...st-to-sue-armstrong-after-oprah-interview.ece

Thanks, I had always mistakenly thought he was their lawyer. Either way, barring some crazy ruling by the arbitrators, LA will paying SCA's legal fees.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Yes a ruling. How does one enforce a ruling if one party refuses to pay or says they don't have the money?

Or party doesn't accept the ruling? They appeal the ruling in a higher court.

Herman the plug will be filing appeals at $0 per day for the next 2 years.

Arbitrators want you to settle. That's why they were created. They encourage you to settle. They exist for no other reason. Not to rule but to bring parties to agreement.

You don't understand attorneys at all.

 

[thehog]

They must have been behind the scenes here, because I do agree with you, but I highly doubt SCA is going to settle for anything less than what they ask for. As to your point about it already being 8 years...what's another year to them?

You tell me?

What's another year? Probably about 700k-950k in legal fees to get back an extra million?

In a higher court with ability of discovery Armstrong can request and subpoena records relevant to the proceedings.

And the key of all legal battles = fatigue. Every lawyer from Texas to Timbuktu knows that you drag out proceedings to force the other side to concede.

Armstrong has their money. They want it. How are they going to get it? Armstrong won't give it back until they've spent enough on legal fees and are fatigued.

Armstrong has to do very little. Just keep filing appeals.

People accept settlements because they can't go on financially and mentally. Everything you've read in the press is posturing.

 

[spetsa]

You don't understand attorneys at all.

Are you saying that you are only going to do pro bono work that benefits you?

 

[thehog]

You don't understand attorneys at all.

In his case it's "in kind". Armstrong made him rich. Semi-retirement to sit in court, say nothing and file an appeal now and then.

Cheap.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Are you saying that you are only going to do pro bono work that benefits you?

I wouldn't do pro bono work for a guy who still vacations in Hawaii even in the face of multiple lawsuits. If you can buy a plane ticket to the islands, you can pay me my freaking money.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

In his case it's "in kind". Armstrong made him rich. Semi-retirement to sit in court, say nothing and file an appeal now and then.

Cheap.

Again, I think you are being way too optimistic about Tim. You talked to me for 2 minutes and I bill in quarter hours only.

 

[mewmewmew13]

I wouldn't do pro bono work for a guy who still vacations in Hawaii even in the face of multiple lawsuits. If you can buy a plane ticket to the islands, you can pay me my freaking money.

All that talk about 'downsizing' was a little overblown..

 

[spetsa]

You tell me?

What's another year? Probably about 700k-950k in legal fees to get back an extra million?

In a higher court with ability of discovery Armstrong can request and subpoena records relevant to the proceedings.

A

Do you really think that a federal appeals court is going to even consider getting involved in something like this? I have very little faith in the US justice system, but my skepticism does not run that deep.

 

[thehog]

Again, I think you are being way too optimistic about Tim. You talked to me for 2 minutes and I bill in quarter hours only.

Your cheap suit would turn me off though

 

[thehog]

Do you really think that a federal appeals court is going to even consider getting involved in something like this? I have very little faith in the US justice system, but my skepticism does not run that deep.

Doesn't matter if they do or not. File an appeal, add 3 months. File another one add 3 months.

This is arbitration remember. A lot of courts to get through. Good times.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Your cheap suit would turn me off though

What I do with your money is my business...but I would at least purchase a tasteful bow tie to go with the cheap suit.

 

[thehog]

What I do with your money is my business...but I would at least purchase a tasteful bow tie to go with the cheap suit.

I'm sure you'll look spiffy. Savile Row for you!

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Doesn't matter if they do or not. File an appeal, add 3 months. File another one add 3 months.

This is arbitration remember. A lot of courts to get through. Good times.

I think you're overplaying the length to which a court will entertain a party's appeal of a decision by an arbitration panel. Courts like to punt those back pretty quickly because the arbitration process is well established and well defended by courts. Also note that appeals are limited to narrower and narrower issues, and the issues used to overturn arbitration decisions are narrow anyway.

Lance can't draw this out as much as you think.