Opinion: Will Armstrong do jail time?

[Velocentric]

LeMond - has been outspoken about doping well before LA won a Tour, again what did he say that was wrong?

LeMond had the gall to speak out against The Second Coming and push back the curtain of silence on something most Cycling fans would want to ignore. Surely that's enough? </sarcasm>

 

[BotanyBay]

An interesting question actually, probably one worthy of its own thread:

What has the Lance Armstrong Foundation done for you?

Every time I've asked that question on Twitter I've been flamed. I may start a new thread here and link to it from Twitter. Could be some interesting experiences from both sides.

Who refuses to wear the ribbon!?!?

 

[jimbob_in_co]

And how are things really? Based on your personal experience with LA

My first CN Forum post

 

[jimbob_in_co]

An interesting question actually, probably one worthy of its own thread:

What has the Lance Armstrong Foundation done for you?

Every time I've asked that question on Twitter I've been flamed. I may start a new thread here and link to it from Twitter. Could be some interesting experiences from both sides.

I lost contact with people I considered my friends after finally expressing my true feelings about the whole situation. Those were eye-opening revelations, to say the least.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Some good posts. Thanks for commenting JimBob.

I say no, LA won't go to jail. I just don't see it. Not only will this drag out, even after indicted and facing federal charges he won't go to jail. Not only can he afford attorneys on the OJ/Robert Blake level, he isn't in as deep of muck as Kenneth Lay or Bernard Madoff who had big money, but no cards left to play and everyone wanted them to hang.

I see Lance and his team dragging everything out as long as possible, then pleading to lesser charges to avoid jail time, then trying to do damage control and spin after that.

 

[mwbyrd]

My first CN Forum post

So I went back and read your posts:

I was never an employee, just a sucker who gave a fair amount of my time and money. As for disgruntled, I'm guilty as charged


It looks like you don't like the LAF. I can understand that.

 

[TexPat]

So I went back and read your posts:

I was never an employee, just a sucker who gave a fair amount of my time and money. As for disgruntled, I'm guilty as charged


It looks like you don't like the LAF. I can understand that.

I prefer the phrase, righteous indignation. The lawyers out there have changed the meaning of disgruntled employee to something akin to postal. No irony there.

 

[Race Radio]

Donations? Who knows who made donations. I mean, a lot of GC riders were never busted for doping...during the 80's and 90's.
Dr. Ferrari? Do your really believe Armstrong was his ONLY client?

Where did I say he should escape sanction? The problem is he could only be sanctione by hearsay. No positive test, no proof other than word of mouth.

LeMond? If he was so interested in cleaning up the sport, why didn't he take on doping as a whole instead of focusing on ONE PERSON, ie LA. LA whom had also won the tour and was American, who just happened to ride for and American Bike Company that owned his own Company. LeMond made a very bad business decision publically going after LA.

Once again, I was just asking 'Why so much Anger' and how has LA's actions personally affected you?

It appears you are repeating talking points, not reality.

*The UCI has admitted Armstrong made at least $125,000 in donations.
*Ferrari had an exclusive deal with Armstrong. He worked with no other GT riders
*LeMond has been talking about doping in the sport for decades. Armstrong likes to pretend everything is all about him....when it clearly isn't.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

He is not going to prison for perjury in the SCA trial because it's outside the statute of limitation. Given the complexity of the likely other charges and the quality of his lawyers, I'm expecting he will wiggle out of jail time somehow.

But, is "I've done too many good things for too many people" about hiding behind LAF, or about calling in favors from complicit employees? If I was Novitsky, I would be watching very closely for witness tampering. Not likely but hey, it's Christmas, so I'm aloud to think happy hater thoughts.

......how has LA's actions personally affected you?

I feel quite bilious every time I see the conniving douchebag's predatory smirk on the telly. HTH

 

[D-Queued]

Donations? Who knows who made donations. I mean, a lot of GC riders were never busted for doping...during the 80's and 90's.
Dr. Ferrari? Do your really believe Armstrong was his ONLY client?

...

Once again, I was just asking 'Why so much Anger' and how has LA's actions personally affected you?

These are well established facts - from the mouths of Ferrari and Armstrong alike.

Perhaps a better question is how much LA has personally benefitted you.

The exclusivity arrangement is detailed in "Lance Armstrong's War" By Coyle. Ferrari himself told this to the Author. There are plenty of books about systematic doping. "Breaking the Chain" is a good place to start.

And, from Lance's own SCA testimony.

Q. Were you concerned at all when you made your contribution to the UCI that other cyclists or members of the cycling public might take it the wrong way?
A. No.
Q. Are you aware of any other professional cyclists who's given money to UCI?
A. I don't know. I'm not aware. Personally, I think there should be -- I think everybody should contribute to the fund

Dave.

 

[AnythingButKestrel]

Jail? I'm beginning to seriously doubt that charges will be filed.

 

[Dallas_]

He is not going to prison for perjury in the SCA trial because it's outside the statute of limitation. Given the complexity of the likely other charges and the quality of his lawyers, I'm expecting he will wiggle out of jail time somehow.

But, is "I've done too many good things for too many people" about hiding behind LAF, or about calling in favors from complicit employees? If I was Novitsky, I would be watching very closely for witness tampering. Not likely but hey, it's Christmas, so I'm aloud to think happy hater thoughts.

Well then:
Would Novitzky go so far as putting wire taps in place before Floyd dropped his bomb? Would that release a treasure trove of info?

Would he have the resources, I mean --> "spending taxpayers dollars" <-- Fabiani would not approve! cheers

 

[elizab]

Why do you consider LA a fraud?

How personally has LA (or any other top cyclist) personally affected you? You seem so angry...

Seriously? Actually, the ignorance is quite entertaining.

 

[elizab]

and then there's mean, evil, and vindictive...

You know him too?

 

[hughmoore]

He wont go to jail because he is innocent.

Merry Christmas

 

[thehog]

He is not going to prison for perjury in the SCA trial because it's outside the statute of limitation. Given the complexity of the likely other charges and the quality of his lawyers, I'm expecting he will wiggle out of jail time somehow.

But, is "I've done too many good things for too many people" about hiding behind LAF, or about calling in favors from complicit employees? If I was Novitsky, I would be watching very closely for witness tampering. Not likely but hey, it's Christmas, so I'm aloud to think happy hater thoughts.



I feel quite bilious every time I see the conniving douchebag's predatory smirk on the telly. HTH

The biggest problem in regards to the SCA case will be a civil suit. This will bring a lot of dirt out of the wash and in to the public domain. Not to mention they'll be going in to get back 30m+.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

The biggest problem in regards to the SCA case will be a civil suit. This will bring a lot of dirt out of the wash and in to the public domain. Not to mention they'll be going in to get back 30m+.

I find it hard to believe there wasn't some sort of "full and final" wording in the settlement that means it can't be re-litigated under any circumstances.

 

[elizab]

I find it hard to believe there wasn't some sort of "full and final" wording in the settlement that means it can't be re-litigated under any circumstances.

Perjury is never pursued in an arbitration case.
Perjury being pursued in a federal case is a completelydifferent matter.
Who cares if Bob Hamman was screwed out of millions to a fraud, right? After all the fraud has done "too much good for too many".

 

[BotanyBay]

Well then:
Would Novitzky go so far as putting wire taps in place before Floyd dropped his bomb? Would that release a treasure trove of info?

Would he have the resources, I mean --> "spending taxpayers dollars" <-- Fabiani would not approve! cheers

If you mean "Do you think Floyd got Lance on tape?" I'd say no way. Lance will assume all of these guys are wired (or taping). And he's also smart enough to use intermediaries to do the communicating. He's only going to talk about doping with his inner circle. Floyd was WAY outside the circle of trust.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

If you mean "Do you think Floyd got Lance on tape?" I'd say no way. Lance will assume all of these guys are wired (or taping). And he's also smart enough to use intermediaries to do the communicating. He's only going to talk about doping with his inner circle. Floyd was WAY outside the circle of trust.

Fixed that for you.

 

[BotanyBay]

Fixed that for you.

Chapeau, Doctor. Chapeau.

 

[Berzin]

When was it that Landis supposedly got his rest day "drink" dumped in the toilet by Bruyneel at the behest of Armstrong, and what were the circumstances surrounding the incident?

I vaguely recall this story being out for a few years but no one ever mentions it.

 

[oldschoolnik]

Mr. Landis claimed in one of his e-mail messages that Johan Bruyneel, the director of Mr. Armstrong’s cycling teams, helped riders cheat. In the instant message conversation, Mr. Vaughters wrote that Mr. Bruyneel and Mr. Armstrong had refused to let Mr. Landis inject a bag of stored blood during the 2004 Tour de France, perhaps because he was leaving the team after that season to go out on his own. Mr. Vaughters wrote:

Funniest thing I ever heard — Johan and Lance dumped Floyd’s rest day blood refill down the toilet in front of him in last yrs Tour to make him ride bad. [...]

That’s from Floyd. He rode this year with no extra blood.>>>

From IM Between JV and Frankie A:
More details and context in link below Google cache of NY Times article on the subject:

http://goo.gl/Sb9rj

 

[thehog]

I find it hard to believe there wasn't some sort of "full and final" wording in the settlement that means it can't be re-litigated under any circumstances.

Its a strange one and I'm interested purely from a geeked legal perspective how SCA round 2 turns out.

Regardless if there was some wording in the final settlement to "no further legal recourse" that won't cover the fact the Armstrong not only lied himself but influenced others to lie.

SCA settled on the basis on the information that was presented.

Now the contract had zero provisions for drug use. The only catchment was if Armstrong was awarded the win by the ruling body then he collects the payout.

Trouble with this is now that he's lied it changes the perspective of the contract. ie if for example the SCA legal team and proven he had doped in the trial and then Armstrong was still awarded the win then there is argument that once the ruling body (ASO in this case) could have stripped him of the title after an investigation. The trial clearly shows Armstrong denying the use of drugs. Now ASO will never get around to residing the win but if the judge had this information at the time he could requested the payment to be held until ASO made some form of statement or began an investigation on the matter. If they didn't after "x" time the money would be awarded.

Its not perjury. The lying is inconsequential in arbitration but its an definite attempt to pervert the course of justice. Thats the bad part. Generally lying results in the course of justice being perverted. Fabrication also comes to mind.

Its simply not accepted to behave in this manner in arbitration and contract law. Its very serious.

Those who go on about statue of limitations etc. don't know what they're talking about. In the UK you see contract law being applied form the 1800's on property and the like. In the US you see contract law being applied from hand written notes on the bottom of beer coasters.

I understand the SCA have been told to "hold fire" on their suit until the Feds are finished. With Floyd as the star witness of the SCA I don't think Armstrong would stand a chance.

The entire topic needs its own thread.

 

[131313]

Mr. Landis claimed in one of his e-mail messages that Johan Bruyneel, the director of Mr. Armstrong’s cycling teams, helped riders cheat. In the instant message conversation, Mr. Vaughters wrote that Mr. Bruyneel and Mr. Armstrong had refused to let Mr. Landis inject a bag of stored blood during the 2004 Tour de France, perhaps because he was leaving the team after that season to go out on his own. Mr. Vaughters wrote:

Funniest thing I ever heard — Johan and Lance dumped Floyd’s rest day blood refill down the toilet in front of him in last yrs Tour to make him ride bad. [...]

That’s from Floyd. He rode this year with no extra blood.>>>

From IM Between JV and Frankie A:
More details and context in link below Google cache of NY Times article on the subject:

http://goo.gl/Sb9rj

And yet, he still finished 4th in the final TT. I guess it is possible to get a result without being completely doped, contrary to what I've read on the internets.