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

[ChewbaccaD]

I think their bottom line strategy is to keep him away from taking an oath.

Yea, I keep forgetting that he will have to expose himself and some of his protectors to legal liability if he tells the truth, but for Betsy's and a lot of other's sake, I hope he goes under oath. I don't think that's gonna happen.

I guess either way (telling the truth or settling), he's gonna take a bath financially. Knowing you're gonna take an a$$ kicking no matter what is a tough place sit, but I can't think of anyone who deserves that seat more than him.

 

[Benotti69]

Yea, I keep forgetting that he will have to expose himself and some of his protectors to legal liability if he tells the truth, but for Betsy's and a lot of other's sake, I hope he goes under oath. I don't think that's gonna happen.

Does Bob Hamman wants his money or his money and a pound of flesh?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Does Bob Hamman wants his money or his money and a pound of flesh?

I get the sense that Hamman wants to see blood...

 

[Benotti69]

I get the sense that Hamman wants to see blood...

I hope so. I so want Armstrong in the box mumbling and stuttering like the P-rick he is.

 

[jraama]

I have a question that the resident legal folks may be able to comment on:

Apart from trying to avoid going under oath, could LA be trying to delay the SCA case to allow the government case to really get going so he has some additional pressure to force a settlement with SCA for less than their full price?

My understanding is that if the government wins a large payout, they get first dibs on assets until they are paid in full, only then will other claimants be allowed to fight over the leftovers. So if there is a reasonable risk to LA's entire fortune from the government case, SCA better get what they can before that case is decided, otherwise there may not be anything left to get.

Even if any SCA award cannot be vacated by bankruptcy, if there is no money left after the government case, they will never fully recover the award.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

I have a question that the resident legal folks may be able to comment on:

Apart from trying to avoid going under oath, could LA be trying to delay the SCA case to allow the government case to really get going so he has some additional pressure to force a settlement with SCA for less than their full price?

My understanding is that if the government wins a large payout, they get first dibs on assets until they are paid in full, only then will other claimants be allowed to fight over the leftovers. So if there is a reasonable risk to LA's entire fortune from the government case, SCA better get what they can before that case is decided, otherwise there may not be anything left to get.

Even if any SCA award cannot be vacated by bankruptcy, if there is no money left after the government case, they will never fully recover the award.

I don't think so because from what I have read the earliest trial date in the Qui Tam case (the Landis Whistleblower case) is 2016 and there is no way SCA will not be working to get him under oath asap.

I cannot answer your question about priorities because I am not familiar with the Qui Tam legislation. It appears you have a bit of a handle on that. Perhaps an American lawyer reading the Clinic with knowledge of the legislation can help you (Chewbacca?)

The immediate problems Lance will have if he testifies in the SCA case are,

1. Tillotson (the SCA lawyer) will ask him if he lied about doping in his previous testimony in Nov/Dec 2005. If LA admits that, it may restart the Statute of Limitations on a criminal prosecution for perjury (Comment - any American lawyers?)

2. He may have to give up the involvement of people like Weisel and Stapleton regarding what they and Tailwind knew about the doping.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I don't think so because from what I have read the earliest trial date in the Qui Tam case (the Landis Whistleblower case) is 2016 and there is no way SCA will not be working to get him under oath asap.

I cannot answer your question about priorities because I am not familiar with the Qui Tam legislation. It appears you have a bit of a handle on that. Perhaps an American lawyer reading the Clinic with knowledge of the legislation can help you (Chewbacca?)

The immediate problems Lance will have if he testifies in the SCA case are,

1. Tillotson (the SCA lawyer) will ask him if he lied about doping in his previous testimony in Nov/Dec 2005. If LA admits that, it may restart the Statute of Limitations on a criminal prosecution for perjury (Comment - any American lawyers?)

2. He may have to give up the involvement of people like Weisel and Stapleton regarding what they and Tailwind knew about the doping.

As far as I know, federal tax liens are the only ones that have super-priority. I don't think federal judgment liens have any more priority over any other judgment lien filed prior in time. Consumer protection and process (including lien priority) is one of those areas I have a little experience with, and I've never seen anything regarding a federal judgment having paramount priority, and my sense is that the government wouldn't really have a basis for enforcing such a statute. Taxes yes, but civil judgment, no. They're just another judgment, though if they were to precede SCA, their judgment would be superior based on time, but not right.

 

[Jspear]

his credibility is shot..........don't believe him

Mark L

I'm sorry I wasn't clear. I meant his money value....With all the different law suit stuff going on right now I was just wondering what type of money income he has....is all this running him dry?

 

[Oldman]

Does Bob Hamman wants his money or his money and a pound of flesh?

Armstrong weighs more than a pound...if they get testimony indicating perjury that could mean his entire a$s.

Ironic that finally Armstrong's take on his 7 Tour wins being stripped focus on "disrespect to the sport"?! He has yet to suggest his Savior and Lord Jesus told him to do it but that last resort is still available to him. I predicted the Oprah moment, this denouement but I can't see him embracing religion...any opinions?

 

[Race Radio]

I have a question that the resident legal folks may be able to comment on:

Apart from trying to avoid going under oath, could LA be trying to delay the SCA case to allow the government case to really get going so he has some additional pressure to force a settlement with SCA for less than their full price?

My understanding is that if the government wins a large payout, they get first dibs on assets until they are paid in full, only then will other claimants be allowed to fight over the leftovers. So if there is a reasonable risk to LA's entire fortune from the government case, SCA better get what they can before that case is decided, otherwise there may not be anything left to get.

Even if any SCA award cannot be vacated by bankruptcy, if there is no money left after the government case, they will never fully recover the award.

At this point Lance is just trying to delay. He has one more shot, the Texas supreme court, that will delay it a bit but ultimately he will have to go under oath or settle.

The original deal with SCA was not a structured settlement. The contracted fee was paid right away and the penalties/fees a few months later. Given lance's large financial exposure I can't imagine any settlement with him would be structured over time, simply too risky.

There is still a chance lance could be stupid enough to go under oath. He did answer questions for the Acceptance insurance case and clearly tried to bluff his way though those. Perhaps he thinks he will be OK if he uses "I don't recall" dozens of times.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

At this point Lance is just trying to delay. He has one more shot, the Texas supreme court, that will delay it a bit but ultimately he will have to go under oath or settle.

The original deal with SCA was not a structured settlement. The contracted fee was paid right away and the penalties/fees a few months later. Given lance's large financial exposure I can't imagine any settlement with him would be structured over time, simply too risky.

There is still a chance lance could be stupid enough to go under oath. He did answer questions for the Acceptance insurance case and clearly tried to bluff his way though those. Perhaps he thinks he will be OK if he uses "I don't recall" dozens of times.

Somewhere in Herman's war room there is a giant flowchart with a bunch of actions and possible outcomes. The top left corner dates back to about 2010, and the bottom right corner dates probably to 2017, the theoretical judgement date of the federal case. Along the bottom there are 2 rows below each milestone columns: 1 for settlement $ and 1 for legal costs. Herman is loving what he sees in his row.....

Said before...Herman has the perfect client. Money to pay, pre-disposed to fight, and guilty. I wonder when the Texas Bar Association will start their closer look into Herman's filings on Armstrong's behalf and start their own little inquiry as to when Herman knowingly filed documents rife with lies......

 

[D-Queued]

Somewhere in Herman's war room there is a giant flowchart with a bunch of actions and possible outcomes. The top left corner dates back to about 2010, and the bottom right corner dates probably to 2017, the theoretical judgement date of the federal case. Along the bottom there are 2 rows below each milestone columns: 1 for settlement $ and 1 for legal costs. Herman is loving what he sees in his row.....

Said before...Herman has the perfect client. Money to pay, pre-disposed to fight, and guilty. I wonder when the Texas Bar Association will start their closer look into Herman's filings on Armstrong's behalf and start their own little inquiry as to when Herman knowingly filed documents rife with lies......

Just thought we should add: Beyond any doubt whatsoever.

Could there be a better legal gravy train?

Dave.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Said before...Herman has the perfect client. Money to pay, pre-disposed to fight, and guilty.

And when it comes time to pay, Wonderboy will cry that he is broke. And on paper, according to the court's rules, he probably will be broke.

Being right doesn't mean getting his money back. Maybe I'm wrong and I will be glad to be wrong.

 

[frenchfry]

I hope so. I so want Armstrong in the box mumbling and stuttering like the P-rick he is.

Maybe he can use Pistorius's acting coach and learn to throw up on command when giving testimony.

 

[Benotti69]

Maybe he can use Pistorius's acting coach and learn to throw up on command when giving testimony.

When he realises he will be losing $$$$$$$ he just might throw up!

 

[mewmewmew13]

maybe he can use pistorius's acting coach and learn to throw up on command when giving testimony.

lololol

 

[Archibald]

It almost seems unethical for them to continue to pursue a legal strategy they have to know is a loser...I know the client makes those types of decisions ultimately, and I would hope that his attorneys are vociferously cautioning him about his choices, but I get the sense that they play along, put the checks in the bank, and tell him he's doing the right things. I guess maybe they see trying to protect his assets as much as possible to be more ethical than stopping their client from gumming up the legal system with baseless, and easily defeated arguments.

He's on a losing streak, and that ain't gonna change anytime soon.

if they're pursuing a guaranteed loss, should they not be providing advice to the contrary?
could this end up with LA suing them for poor/bad advice (assuming that they've not already advised against the current course of action)? ie; a way of LA recouping some of his losses? or would there be some sort of hold-harmless agreement in their contract with him?

 

[Race Radio]

if they're pursuing a guaranteed loss, should they not be providing advice to the contrary?
could this end up with LA suing them for poor/bad advice (assuming that they've not already advised against the current course of action)? ie; a way of LA recouping some of his losses? or would there be some sort of hold-harmless agreement in their contract with him?

Crooks seldom sue their co-conspirators

 

[Archibald]

Crooks seldom sue their co-conspirators

honour amongst thieves?

 

[MarkvW]

if they're pursuing a guaranteed loss, should they not be providing advice to the contrary?
could this end up with LA suing them for poor/bad advice (assuming that they've not already advised against the current course of action)? ie; a way of LA recouping some of his losses? or would there be some sort of hold-harmless agreement in their contract with him?

Evaluating the logic behind Lance's decisions at this point depends upon knowing the amount of money Lance has in his piggy bank.

If Lance has insufficient funds to cover the reasonably anticipated expense of an adverse judgment in the Qui Tam case, then he's just spending the US Government's money messing with SCA, fighting the US, and delaying the eventual financial devastation.

If Lance has enough money to cover those reasonably anticipated expenses, then Lance ought to sit down and negotiate with SCA. Burning up his own money on frivolous forays into state court is just plain stupid (like you suggest).

Texas has liberal homestead exemptions and Lance has scaled down his house... That's some (small) sign that he's preparing for financial armageddon.

 

[MarkvW]

Crooks seldom sue their co-conspirators

That's just because accomplices and co-conspirators usually have empty pockets.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Armstrong weighs more than a pound...if they get testimony indicating perjury that could mean his entire a$s.

Ironic that finally Armstrong's take on his 7 Tour wins being stripped focus on "disrespect to the sport"?! He has yet to suggest his Savior and Lord Jesus told him to do it but that last resort is still available to him. I predicted the Oprah moment, this denouement but I can't see him embracing religion...any opinions?

I don't think even Lance knows how all this will wash out. I think he goes day to day keeping in contact with his lawyers on SCA. Perhaps he hopes he can settle the Qui Tam in due course. I suspect his lawyers are just trying to keep him away from giving evidence under oath re: the perjury issues etc.

Jesus - never. Lance is just too Lance.

 

[Oldman]

I don't think even Lance knows how all this will wash out. I think he goes day to day keeping in contact with his lawyers on SCA. Perhaps he hopes he can settle the Qui Tam in due course. I suspect his lawyers are just trying to keep him away from giving evidence under oath re: the perjury issues etc.

Jesus - never. Lance is just too Lance.

Would looking in the mirror and saying "Lance...have mercy on me" be the same thing?

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

I don't think even Lance knows how all this will wash out. I think he goes day to day keeping in contact with his lawyers on SCA. Perhaps he hopes he can settle the Qui Tam in due course. I suspect his lawyers are just trying to keep him away from giving evidence under oath re: the perjury issues etc.

Jesus - never. Lance is just too Lance.

I think he is dragging so there is more time to implicate Weisel, who has the ability to pay. That way the judgement is divided up somewhat if they can nail Weisel.

 

[MarkvW]

I think he is dragging so there is more time to implicate Weisel, who has the ability to pay. That way the judgement is divided up somewhat if they can nail Weisel.

Lance needs help to implicate Weasel with anything more than his own unbelievable testimony. Who would step up to help Lance and hurt Weasel? Who, with decisive evidence would (a) be sufficiently credible; (b) be willing to expose himself/herself as a participant in the USPS conspiracy; and (c) have evidence that isn't already known? How would more time help Lance find a person who satisfies those criteria?

Can't see that as a reason for delay. Can see Lance turning on Weasel, though.

Turning on Weasel is a double edged sword for Lance. Every bit of proof that implicates Weasel further implicates Lance and drives up the damage award (and the settlement amount possibility). Lance would still be liable for ALL that amount. The only thing implicating Weasel gets him is the opportunity for him (Lance) to sue Weasel to make Weasel pay his fair share of the judgment.