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

[Dr. Maserati]

What do you base the bolded assertion on?

IMHO if he just receives a civil penalty after a long criminal investigation it will be a big black eye for the Federal Govt.

With Marion Jones as a precedent I don't see the possibility of him doing less than a year, even if he flips spectacularly.

He's attacked too many people for anything other than a complete victory, slim chance, or absolute destruction.

Firstly - I am not convinced that LA will serve any prison time.
For that to happen he would have to be directly exposed to criminal or financial acts - that is why he has someone like Stapleton working for him.
It would be his job to attempt to insulate Armstrong from any potential threat, having a myriad of companies etc- however they may not have been expecting the spotlight from the Feds.

So, it is people who ran the operations that are in the most danger of doing jail time - Knaggs, Stapleton, and on the Wiesel side Gorski, Osipow and Ochowicz.

I doubt it would bother the Feds if LA was not jailed - the deceit and fraud would be exposed and it will cost him a huge amount to attempt to defend.
Their primary interest is exposing and dismantling doping networks and that they are not put off going after cases because of who you are or how much money you have.

As for Jones - she did not go to jail for doping, she went because she lied to the Feds who were investigating BALCO. She was a witness, while Armstrong will be one of the targets.

 

[MarkvW]

***Insert Insulting Language Here**** What time restrictions are placed on SCA filing suit? Does the countdown start after they paid Armstrong or when the fraud is proved or revealed?

With $7.5M paid in 2005 plus legal fees plus interest, the figure could be $20M. Then there are the other years that SCA paid. Add damages for perjury and the final figure may be huge.

Why the personal insults? What have I done, other than express opinions that you do not agree with?

 

[thehog]

Here is a question for a lawyer, a real lawyer, not Marky the Wonder Googler. What time restrictions are placed on SCA filing suit? Does the countdown start after they paid Armstrong or when the fraud is proved or revealed?

With $7.5M paid in 2005 plus legal fees plus interest, the figure could be $20M. Then there are the other years that SCA paid. Add damages for perjury and the final figure may be huge.

I didn't say so before but SCA will break the camels back. Mainly because he paid off so many witnesses with .org money and lied in arbitration proceedings.

If they prove the 2001 TdS positive/cover-up then SCA is in the bag. I think its still in the bag without this because off the payoffs. If SCA were aware that they were being set up they may have not settled.

Right you are they will get their 7.5m back in addition to potential loss of revenues that the "hedge" brought and the black mark it put on the company name.

20m seems obtainable but probably a lot more.

 

[BroDeal]

Why the personal insults? What have I done, other than express opinions that you do not agree with?

Your opinions have nothing to do with it. When you pretend to be something you are not, people form a low opinion of you. Funny how that works.

I would just like an answer from somone who knows what they are talking about, not someone who pretends that he does. If I wanted an answer from Google then I would do it myself.

 

[MarkvW]

Your opinions have nothing to do with it. When you pretend to be something you are not, people form a low opinion of you. Funny how that works.

I would just like an answer from somone who knows what they are talking about, not someone who pretends that he does. If I wanted an answer from Google then I would do it myself.

When have I ever pretended to be something I am not? You are making that up and that is not honest.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

When have I ever pretended to be something I am not? You are making that up and that is not honest.

Only because you bring it up - we did try and clear that up a while ago:

I never said I made it up, so I can't tell you where I said I made it up. Please tell me where "finally admit I'm not a lawyer." I must have missed that episode.

When asked to clear up that post you stated your 'legal experience'...

I've read lots of legal stuff. Those cases that I listed at the beginning of this discussion? I read them! They taught me stuff about the FCPA that I shared with you. I've also talked about legal stuff with other people (some of whom are learned in the law)! That's the relevant experience, I guess.

But hey! You could just buy Python's reasoning and blithely assume that the feds have no SOL problems in charging the old stuff.

Please forgive me for not submitting to your obsessive inquiry, but once when I tried to explain to you that an incriminating document found in a garbage dump has less evidentiary value than the same document found in Lance's house, you argued that it did not--that "evidence is evidence." I've just given you some evidence of my legal experience. Why should I have to give more? After all, evidence is evidence, isn't it?

From these two pages (702 & 703)on this thread earlier

 

[MarkvW]

Only because you bring it up - we did try and clear that up a while ago:


When asked to clear up that post you stated your 'legal experience'...

From these two pages (702 & 703)on this thread earlier

And you have no basis for saying I have no "legal experience." And I don't want to get in a discussion with you, Maserati. You might "quote" something I never said.

 

[palmerq]

lets please not get into another personal argument in this thread... its not about markvw but armstrong, so can we please move on?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

And you have no basis for saying I have no "legal experience." And I don't want to get in a discussion with you, Maserati. You might "quote" something I never said.

While I will comply with palmerqs point - I just wanted to say I never said you had no legal experience.
Not only did I not comment on it I quoted your responses to what your 'legal experience' is.

 

[thehog]

While I will comply with palmerqs point - I just wanted to say I never said you had no legal experience.
Not only did I not comment on it I quoted your responses to what your 'legal experience' is.

Seriously mate - for the sake of the forum give it a rest.

Just let it go.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

I'm sorry,

Firstly - I am not convinced that LA will serve any prison time.
For that to happen he would have to be directly exposed to criminal or financial acts - that is why he has someone like Stapleton working for him.
It would be his job to attempt to insulate Armstrong from any potential threat, having a myriad of companies etc- however they may not have been expecting the spotlight from the Feds.

So, it is people who ran the operations that are in the most danger of doing jail time - Knaggs, Stapleton, and on the Wiesel side Gorski, Osipow and Ochowicz.

I doubt it would bother the Feds if LA was not jailed - the deceit and fraud would be exposed and it will cost him a huge amount to attempt to defend.
Their primary interest is exposing and dismantling doping networks and that they are not put off going after cases because of who you are or how much money you have.

As for Jones - she did not go to jail for doping, she went because she lied to the Feds who were investigating BALCO. She was a witness, while Armstrong will be one of the targets.

I see a lot of meaningless distinctions in your theory of the crime.

Marion Jones went to jail because she committed perjury when asked questions regarding an investigation into doping. Whether she was a witness, the actual intended target, or if the Feds changed their targets because of where the evidence lead, means little or nothing. She lied about doping after antagonizing the hell out of anyone who told the truth or wanted to know the truth.

Armstrong, by his actions, has made himself the focus of this investigation. Knaggs and Stapleton exist because of Armstrong, not the other way around.

To think that Armstrong did not become an equal player with Wiesel and Ochowicz, eventually surpassing them, is to kid yourself. Did any of these people make Armstrong comeback?

Is it probable that we would have even reached this point had Armstrong not come back?

Armstrong and his prominence is the key here. As far as I'm aware, no one is going after Joe Wieder or whoever the heck it is that runs the Mr. Olympia. It's clear as day what's going on and no one cares. Are we to expect a Federal Investigation into Ronnie Coleman or whoever the reigning muscle head is now?

 

[Ulle Relaxes]

I look at this thread and all I see is pointless conjecture.

 

[ChrisE]

I reported post 10332, and referred to it in the mod thread.

Is accusing other members of this allowed now, contrary to public statements by the mods? Is accusing somebody of that an "insult"?

I need to know, because there are alot of "groups" I can accuse people in here of being a part of if it is allowed. Thanks.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Crickets.

I always wanted to quote one of my own posts. Now I know how the hog feels.

 

[ChrisE]

I look at this thread and all I see is pointless conjecture.

Sirens! Sirens!

Hey bud, just a word of advice. You haven't been here long enough to have an opinion like you just posted.

 

[Race Radio]

Sirens! Sirens!

Hey bud, just a word of advice. You haven't been here long enough to have an opinion like you just posted.

I think he is talking about Polish and the boys

 

[LarryBudMelman]

Sirens! Sirens!

Hey bud, just a word of advice. You haven't been here long enough to have an opinion like you just posted.

Pointless conjecture? Chris E, both you and I know that there is info on this forum that you can take to the bank.

Anyway, if people want to think there is nothing behind the armstrong investigation, that is their prerogative.

I haven't a clue as to their motivation in wanting to believe this; ie, why they're so invested in propping up false idols, although this mode of thinking is fascinating to me.

 

[AcademyCC]

Sirens! Sirens!

Hey bud, just a word of advice. You haven't been here long enough to have an opinion like you just posted.

who says? Are you the king?

 

[patricknd]

===edit by mod===

To ChrisE, per Greg LeMond, Armstrong is a sociopath. That's as close to a correct diagnosis as any I've seen or been aware of.

What point are you trying to make? To me there doesn't seem to be any point.

Aphronesis; I haven't seen you contribute one relevant piece of information or one relevant question about Armstrong or his critics. Please ask or state something clearly. Bottom line, what's your point?

i'm confused. according to greg lemond and you, armstrong is a sociopath, or according to ChrisE? of the three who has the credentials to make this diagnosis?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I see a lot of meaningless distinctions in your theory of the crime.

Marion Jones went to jail because she committed perjury when asked questions regarding an investigation into doping. Whether she was a witness, the actual intended target, or if the Feds changed their targets because of where the evidence lead, means little or nothing. She lied about doping after antagonizing the hell out of anyone who told the truth or wanted to know the truth.

Hardly meaningless - Jones was done for perjury. Nothing to do with doping.
As Armstrong will be a target, not a witness he wont be questioned by the Feds (like Jones) but on a stand. Even if he lies there (big if) they do not usually pursue perjury charges.

Armstrong, by his actions, has made himself the focus of this investigation. Knaggs and Stapleton exist because of Armstrong, not the other way around.

To think that Armstrong did not become an equal player with Wiesel and Ochowicz, eventually surpassing them, is to kid yourself. Did any of these people make Armstrong comeback?

Is it probable that we would have even reached this point had Armstrong not come back?

Armstrong and his prominence is the key here. As far as I'm aware, no one is going after Joe Wieder or whoever the heck it is that runs the Mr. Olympia. It's clear as day what's going on and no one cares. Are we to expect a Federal Investigation into Ronnie Coleman or whoever the reigning muscle head is now?

No doubt Armstrong is the name and that he will be the center of any media focus.
But as for doing jail time - as I said, others will be in a more direct firing line than LA - so even though I would love to see it these types usually have enough distance from any crimes and the money to fight/reduce exposure jail time.

 

[180mmCrank]

Everyone's opinion is valid and this should be respected

I don't think #posts is the best metric for who knows what they are talking about.

I have 1500 and I certainly don't have a clue

T

 

[AcademyCC]

is that not the point of internet forums that you can post what you think? or do you need to post a thousand times for your post to be valid?

 

[180mmCrank]

is that not the point of internet forums that you can post what you think? or do you need to post a thousand times for your post to be valid?

See above...

 

[AcademyCC]

Hope rides again

 

[Ulle Relaxes]

I'm not Mr. Armstrong's greatest fan yet I clearly don't get the pleasure some posters do making pronouncements on the man when clearly all the facts are not on the table. I mean the investigation is taking it's own sweet time I don't see the point of making conjecture whether Lance will end up in jail, will end up broke, will end up in a mental asylum when it is clear the prosecutors aren't ready to put everything on the line as yet.

The short point is there is no use pretending you know sh*t about sh*t since in all likelihood the prosecutors are still trying to get their sh*t together.

 

[fatandfast]

I look at this thread and all I see is pointless conjecture.

if you look closer there is a Tuesday time frame. Many Tuesdays have gone by since the prediction that Lance would be toasted on a Tuesday. Closer still people want to freshen up their forecast of an Armstrong indictment. More recent things about his passport,travel plans and restrictions. Lots of posts about felony tax code violations. Repayment of monies won in an out of court settlement.
Overturning sports records without trial.
Other posts about the conviction and character of employees of livestrong. If you find conjecture in the cat box then yes conjecture.
Armstrong has yet to accused of a crime. But during an inquiry his guilt and that of 20 years of associates, team mates ,race organizers, police,airport officials,federations throughout the world have all been confirmed.

Did Armstrong do drugs during his career?.yes. Does that reflect on the people all the way down to the receptionist at livestrong as they try and help people in need?no