Official Lance Armstrong Thread **READ POST #1 BEFORE POSTING**

[MarkvW]

Yes, why stop now.

By the way, I've spent the last 15 years working as an expert witness, been deposed nearly 100 times, and testified at both arbitration and trial. I have read countless rulings, motions, declarations, and deposition testimony.

I have read case law at both the state and federal level regarding production of evidence, qualifications for expert witnesses and expert testimony. I've also been asked on numerous occasions to provide expert responses to claims made, based on my understanding and knowledge of current case law in my area of expertise.

I probably have nearly 200 attorneys in my Outlook Contacts, and have given several dozen lectures and served as an expert panelist on MCLE-accredited seminars.

I suppose that makes me Clarence Darrow...

Why stop there? Why not John W. Davis? THERE was a stupendously great advocate.

 

[Velodude]

I doubt they'll be able to get Lance in a conspiracy to evade taxes, because I doubt they'll be able to prove he conspired with anybody else to evade taxes. Tax evasion, by itself, has a six year statute of limitations. That would appear to have expired in 2008, if we're talking about income that should have been reported in 2002.

When was the money laundering crime conspiracy completed? What act completed it?

I believe the consensus points to RICO indictments from the GJ for LA and his fellow directors & shareholders in Tailwind Sports, the owner then part owner (together with LA's company) of the US Postal cycling team.

RICO can extend back 10 years for "racketeering" offenses which include money laundering and income tax evasion trumping other statutes of limitation.

Why do you think Floyd's accounting of US Postal doping events has relevance to the Novitzky investigation?

Because his team membership of US Postal relates to the 2002-2004 years - the same years of the the contract period between USPS and Tailwind where a provision of the sponsorship contract forbid doping. A breach of that provision relating to a contract that involves deemed government funding gives Novitzky & Co the opportunity to lay Federal charges.

Directors of a corporation who agreed or had knowledge without registering a formal protest of corporation income not being returned as income assessable for tax are party to a conspiracy. RICO then lumps the shareholders into the mix for good measure.

Why don't you run your responses before a real lawyer before hitting the submit button?

 

[Race Radio]

http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601

Lance cancels his long planned, and promoted, trip to Brazil. Cites "Personal reasons" Target letters are very personal

 

[Race Radio]

Here's what I take from what you've written: You can't point to a particular cover-up crime or ongoing crime that Armstrong conspired to commit with another person, but you believe that there must be one out there. Time will tell.

I hope you're right about the 2005 title and 2009 podium.

YOU are confused. It does not have to be isolated to a specific event. Floyd, George, and Tyler have all said that the got drugs from Lance. I expect RICO to play a part in the upcoming indictments, which will show a decade long conspiracy and will render SOL mute.

 

[Anonymous]

Again, I defy you to find an instance of equitable tolling that was applied in a federal criminal prosecution. Come on now.

US v. Midgley. The court didn't actually apply the concept (if by apply you mean rule in favor. However they did apply the concept to the facts at hand, thus application did occur, just not in the affirmative) in that instance, but it did open up the possibility of affirmative application stating that "Although the doctrine of equitable tolling is most typically applied to limitation periods on civil actions, see Irwin, 498 U.S. at 95, 111 S.Ct. at 457, “there is no reason to distinguish between the rights protected by criminal and civil statutes of limitations.” Powers v. Southland Corp., 4 F.3d 223, 233 (3d Cir.1993). Federal courts invoke the doctrine of equitable tolling “only sparingly,” and will not toll a statute because of “what is at best a garden variety claim of excusable neglect” on the part of the defendant."

Now, that has nothing to do with this situation, but as pointed out, RICO is most likely on the table, so I think maybe, just maybe, RR was referring to RICO, and a quick search of Westlaw under "RICO" /s "equitable tolling" (because Google is for amateurs) returned a plethora (168 to be exact) of cases. I don't have time to wade through, but I would bet even Google would present you with ample instances.

 

[Race Radio]

Please direct all future questions to my legal intern TFF

 

[CSquare43]

.....George..... have all said that the got drugs from Lance.

I've seen this several times on here, but I don't think I've ever seen it outside of this forum.

Did George actually say this (has his grand jury testimony been leaked??)??

 

[Race Radio]

I've seen this several times on here, but I don't think I've ever seen it outside of this forum.

Did George actually say this (has his grand jury testimony been leaked??)??

It was on 60 minutes. No GJ testimony has been leaked.

 

[Anonymous]

I've seen this several times on here, but I don't think I've ever seen it outside of this forum.

Did George actually say this (has his grand jury testimony been leaked??)??

First post is this? Seriously? It was on 60 Minutes (which under any reasonable interpretation qualifies as "outside of the forum") and the information could have come from a plethora of sources who were not in the GJ room because Hincapie isn't barred from telling people what he said, and I am guessing he told the wrong person something he wanted to keep secret.

Now, go find an internet gaming forum to troll.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I doubt they'll be able to get Lance in a conspiracy to evade taxes, because I doubt they'll be able to prove he conspired with anybody else to evade taxes. Tax evasion, by itself, has a six year statute of limitations. That would appear to have expired in 2008, if we're talking about income that should have been reported in 2002.

When was the money laundering crime conspiracy completed? What act completed it?

Damn, Mr Fabiani, it looks as though Lance is just a regular citizen.

I am sure that when Armstrong said he didn't get paid a salary on his return, that he indeed did not get paid a salary - no salary, no tax, right.
Or when it was noticed that appearance fee's were not going to Livestrong as suggested but in to his pocket that he will have declared every cent.

As for the "crime conspiracy completed", well we might need to open a separate thread to discuss the terms "crime", "conspiracy" and "completed" - I am confident that when LA met Ferrari in 2010 that it was just two old friends meeting up to discuss the past.

 

[Race Radio]

Damn, Mr Fabiani, it looks as though Lance is just a regular citizen.

I am sure that when Armstrong said he didn't get paid a salary on his return, that he indeed did not get paid a salary, no salary, no tax, right.
Or when it was noticed that appearance fee's were not going to Livestrong as suggested but in to his pocket that he will have declared every cent.

As for the "crime conspiracy completed", well we might need to open a separate thread to discuss the terms "crime", "conspiracy" and "completed" - I am confident that when LA met Ferrari in 2010 that it was just two old friends meeting up to discuss the past.

Yup, just an old friend.....that he gave bags of cash to

 

[Fausto's Schnauzer]

the information could have come from a plethora of sources who were not in the GJ room...

You realize that Phil Ligget holds the rights to that word. You owe him a royalty.

 

[Cimacoppi49]

http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601

Lance cancels his long planned, and promoted, trip to Brazil. Cites "Personal reasons" Target letters are very personal

Spock called. He found this "fascinating."
He may have been served with a Grand Jury subpoena. The target letter would not stop his travel plans.

 

[wirral]

The fact that I have just read too many pages of the same old faces still sniping at one another tells me there is nothing new on this story.

 

[MarkvW]

Damn, Mr Fabiani, it looks as though Lance is just a regular citizen.

I am sure that when Armstrong said he didn't get paid a salary on his return, that he indeed did not get paid a salary - no salary, no tax, right.
Or when it was noticed that appearance fee's were not going to Livestrong as suggested but in to his pocket that he will have declared every cent.

As for the "crime conspiracy completed", well we might need to open a separate thread to discuss the terms "crime", "conspiracy" and "completed" - I am confident that when LA met Ferrari in 2010 that it was just two old friends meeting up to discuss the past.

Have you even seen Armstrong's tax returns? How can you reasonably infer he has committed a tax crime? Has hate fully blinded your reason?

 

[CSquare43]

First post is this? Seriously? It was on 60 Minutes (which under any reasonable interpretation qualifies as "outside of the forum") and the information could have come from a plethora of sources who were not in the GJ room because Hincapie isn't barred from telling people what he said, and I am guessing he told the wrong person something he wanted to keep secret.

Now, go find an internet gaming forum to troll.

Slow down [/Brand Nubian]

No trolling.....in any way at all. I haven't watched the 60 Minutes segment and haven't heard it from George's mouth in interviews/etc. I've seen it online that he said it, but haven't heard anything substantive for proof...

I was asking a serious, simple question...genuinely looking for an answer.

I'll check out the 60 Mins clip...

But you on the other hand, you may want to take a valium or 2....

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Have you even seen Armstrong's tax returns? How can you reasonably infer he has committed a tax crime? Has hate fully blinded your reason?

You're right, I haven't seen Armstrongs tax returns.

However, I am going to take a wild guess that they did not claim tax benefit on purchasing doping products nor will there be a happy receipt from Dr. Ferrari saying, "training, paid with grazie" on it.

 

[thehog]

I've seen this several times on here, but I don't think I've ever seen it outside of this forum.

Did George actually say this (has his grand jury testimony been leaked??)??

OK Rookie step aside. You need to come up to speed quickly. Don't come anywhere near this thread without the facts.

 

[thehog]

You're right, I haven't seen Armstrongs tax returns.

However, I am going to take a wild guess that they did not claim tax benefit on purchasing doping products nor will there be a happy receipt from Dr. Ferrari saying, "training, paid with grazie" on it.

....and we haven't seen the Livestrong 2010 tax returns because for some reason they STILL haven't been published

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Slow down [/Brand Nubian]

No trolling.....in any way at all. I haven't watched the 60 Minutes segment and haven't heard it from George's mouth in interviews/etc. I've seen it online that he said it, but haven't heard anything substantive for proof...

I was asking a serious, simple question...genuinely looking for an answer.

I'll check out the 60 Mins clip...

But you on the other hand, you may want to take a valium or 2....

From Velonews (with link to CBS clips):

According to CBS News, Hincapie testified that he and Armstrong supplied each other with EPO and discussed having used testosterone to prepare for races.

And Hincapies reply when he was questioned by Velonews on the 60 minutes story:

“I know you’ve got a job and you’ve got to ask these questions. I’ve got a job too,” Hincapie told VeloNews at the team’s hotel in Paso Robles, California. “My job’s here to race my bike, promote the sport that we all love; that I’ve sacrificed my whole life for and I just have no interest in dragging this sport through the mud, so I’m sorry, but I have no comment.”

 

[MacRoadie]

....and we haven't seen the Livestrong 2010 tax returns because for some reason they STILL haven't been published

Actually, I believe they have:

Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax 2010

 

[CSquare43]

.....

Thank you. Appreciate that.

 

[Anonymous]

Slow down [/Brand Nubian]

No trolling.....in any way at all. I haven't watched the 60 Minutes segment and haven't heard it from George's mouth in interviews/etc. I've seen it online that he said it, but haven't heard anything substantive for proof...

I was asking a serious, simple question...genuinely looking for an answer.

I'll check out the 60 Mins clip...

But you on the other hand, you may want to take a valium or 2....

I just want to make sure I am clear on this: You know enough about this forum to know that the "only place" the information about Hincapie has been presented to the world is here, and yoru VERY FIRST POST mentioned GJ leaks, and again, YOUR FIRST POST ON THIS SITE was in this thread questioning this information...yet I am out of line thinking you are trolling...mmmkay, I guess having read 50 or so people doing the same type of thing over the past few years has jaded me...

 

[CSquare43]

I just want to make sure I am clear on this: You know enough about this forum to know that the "only place" the information about Hincapie has been presented to the world is here, and yoru VERY FIRST POST mentioned GJ leaks, and again, YOUR FIRST POST ON THIS SITE was in this thread questioning this information...yet I am out of line thinking you are trolling...mmmkay, I guess having read 50 or so people doing the same type of thing over the past few years has jaded me...

I'm not well enough informed about the George testimony angle and was asking for clarification...I've seen it talked about here, but hadn't seen a report that basically said "GH said he and Lance used together".....I thought I missed something.

So I asked for clarification.

That's it, no trolling, just looking for more info on something that I don't know much about. 1st or 5000th post, it shouldn't matter. I'm uninformed, looking to become more informed.

*** edited by mod ***

 

[MarkvW]

US v. Midgley. The court didn't actually apply the concept (if by apply you mean rule in favor. However they did apply the concept to the facts at hand, thus application did occur, just not in the affirmative) in that instance, but it did open up the possibility of affirmative application stating that "Although the doctrine of equitable tolling is most typically applied to limitation periods on civil actions, see Irwin, 498 U.S. at 95, 111 S.Ct. at 457, “there is no reason to distinguish between the rights protected by criminal and civil statutes of limitations.” Powers v. Southland Corp., 4 F.3d 223, 233 (3d Cir.1993). Federal courts invoke the doctrine of equitable tolling “only sparingly,” and will not toll a statute because of “what is at best a garden variety claim of excusable neglect” on the part of the defendant."

Now, that has nothing to do with this situation, but as pointed out, RICO is most likely on the table, so I think maybe, just maybe, RR was referring to RICO, and a quick search of Westlaw under "RICO" /s "equitable tolling" (because Google is for amateurs) returned a plethora (168 to be exact) of cases. I don't have time to wade through, but I would bet even Google would present you with ample instances.

I ran "racketeer influenced" & "equitable tolling"& ti("United States") and got 26 cases. I added the "united states" in the title to weed out the civil RICO cases, because in every criminal fed prosecution the US is a party. This left a bunch of cases where the US was the defendant or the case was noncriminal (irrelevant) and where the defendant was trying to use equitable tolling to get around a postconviction relief time bar (irrelevant).
Only one case mentioned equitable tolling--Kozeny (which I've already mentioned). The mention was brief--the opinion merely stated that the government had failed in an earlier attempt to use equitable tolling.

Read US V. Atiyeh, 402 F.3d 354 at 367. Show me a case where equitable tolling EVER extended the SOL in a criminal case! You can't.