Qui Tam, Baby

Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
Looks like senior lawyers in the Justice Department is recommending taking the qui tam case on!!
 
Sep 21, 2012
296
0
0
Ferminal said:
Who actually makes the decision?
Link to the WSJ article: Justice Department Takes Aim at Armstrong
The article doesn't specifically say but it's like the Justice Department's commercial litigation branch making the recommendation.
It's going to be a government/corporate/political style decision making process.

I found a tidbit in the article informative:
The contract said "negative publicity" due to "alleged possession, use or sale of banned substances" by riders or team personnel would constitute an "event of default," as would a failure to take "action" if a rider violates a morals or drug clause
 
Jun 16, 2012
210
0
0
ValleyFlowers said:
Link to the WSJ article: Justice Department Takes Aim at Armstrong
The article doesn't specifically say but it's like the Justice Department's commercial litigation branch making the recommendation.
It's going to be a government/corporate/political style decision making process.

I found a tidbit in the article informative:
The contract said "negative publicity" due to "alleged possession, use or sale of banned substances" by riders or team personnel would constitute an "event of default," as would a failure to take "action" if a rider violates a morals or drug clause
Another tidbit worth a little focus - the last day for DOJ to join the suit is Thursday. Same day as the Oprah show. What a coincidence.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Two words that should cause Armstrong to go looking for another line of credit: treble damages.

That is going to leave a mark.
 
ChewbaccaD said:
Two words that should cause Armstrong to go looking for another line of credit because of these two words: treble damages.

That is going to leave a mark.
His share would max out at about $10M. It would probably be even lower since he was not officially an owner of the team for the first few years. The Weasel has the Benjamins to pay, so it is not like Armstrong will be the one deep pocket that is capable of making good on a judgement..
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
BroDeal said:
His share would max out at about $10M. It would probably be even lower since he was not officially an owner of the team for the first few years. The Weasel has the Benjamins to pay, so it is not like Armstrong will be the one deep pocket that is capable of making good on a judgement..
Oh no, joint and several for sure.
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
I got this idea from somebody else: What if Lance snitches off team management in the qui tam?
 
Oct 7, 2010
123
0
0
I am beginning to think that this Qui Tam case is the reason he is coming forward with an admittance of guilt. His attempts to pay back some money as well. Although we had not heard much about the case, movements within and the like, I believe he was hearing those footsteps. Investigators, interviews and other aspects had to begin showing weakness to his people and him as well. Now they have to try to go on offense and maybe head this horse off at the pass somehow. The USADA case was nothing compared to this one. Perhaps his lawyers were quite smart, don't fight the USADA, but prep to fight the Qui Tam one, that is where all the eggs are in that particular basket.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
MarkvW said:
I got this idea from somebody else: What if Lance snitches off team management in the qui tam?
Take triple damages for USPS, the SCA case, Times case, whoever else is in the wings and you'll have a good idea that he's got few choices. Oh; and there's that niggling possibility that this could blow into a criminal perjury action.
The toilets are flushing overtime at T.Weisel Securities.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
Two words that should cause Armstrong to go looking for another line of credit: treble damages.

That is going to leave a mark.
I will consider justice done when Floyd winds up with several million of Lance's dollars.

This, to me, is the very best possible outcome.
 
PotentialPro said:
I am beginning to think that this Qui Tam case is the reason he is coming forward with an admittance of guilt. His attempts to pay back some money as well. Although we had not heard much about the case, movements within and the like, I believe he was hearing those footsteps. Investigators, interviews and other aspects had to begin showing weakness to his people and him as well. Now they have to try to go on offense and maybe head this horse off at the pass somehow. The USADA case was nothing compared to this one. Perhaps his lawyers were quite smart, don't fight the USADA, but prep to fight the Qui Tam one, that is where all the eggs are in that particular basket.
The first part, yes. But I think BroDeal has the best take on this. LA's maximum liability is probably about $6 million, 10% of double damages. Rather than fight this case, if he accepts it--or fights it with the knowledge that this is the worst case scenario--SCA no longer has leverage with him. The main reason he would settle with SCA is to avoid testifying. But if he has to testify in QT, then he can fight SCA. And since he might win, SCA is more likely to settle for less than the $12 million they wanted. So much if not all of the $6 million he might have to pay the government might be saved in money he doesn't have to pay SCA.

So the government joining Floyd could be bad news for SCA, and not really be much worse for LA. Not only financially, but it means he can confess in public. The only thing he really has to lose here is the possibility of criminal charges. I'll leave it to others to estimate the likelihood of that.
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
To me, it's looking more and more like Lance provided a sworn statement under oath to Birotte--just like the other Posties did--and received a free pass for his testimony--just like the other Posties did.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
dont think it about the money for SCA.

The principal is a professional poker player.

This is about face, and burying armstrong in muck.
 
MarkvW said:
To me, it's looking more and more like Lance provided a sworn statement under oath to Birotte--just like the other Posties did--and received a free pass for his testimony--just like the other Posties did.
I don't think so. This article by Juliet Macur makes me think that the good ol' boys from Texas have decided to throw Weisel under the bus. These guys are tight and they go way back. Weisel may have been a patron but he is not one of them. They are circling the wagons to save themselves. Verbruggen, McQauid, Weisel, Madame Amaury, eveyone is fair game. They have been negotiating deals in the backgrounds for the last few months.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/15/sports/cycling/lance-armstrong-admits-doping-and-says-he-will-testify-against-cycling-officials.html?hp&_r=1&

He is also in discussions with the United States Department of Justice to possibly testify in a federal whistleblower case against several team owners, including the investment banker Thom Weisel, and other team officials of the cycling squad that was sponsored by the United States Postal Service team in the mid-to-late 1990s and early 2000s, one person close to the situation said. That person did not want his name published because the case is still open.

Floyd Landis, one of Armstrong’s former teammates, filed the whistleblower case in 2010 against Armstrong and other principals of the Postal Service team on which he and Armstrong competed together for several years. Landis claimed that team defrauded the government because its riders used performance-enhancing drugs that were forbidden in its main sponsorship contract.

Now Armstrong and possibly his longtime agent, Bill Stapleton, are seeking to repay several millions of dollars of the more than $30 million the Postal Service spent on sponsoring the team, as part of their cooperation as witnesses in the case, said the person with knowledge of the matter. The Department of Justice is considering whether to join the case as a plaintiff and is close to making that decision, the person said.
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
BroDeal said:
I don' think so. This article by Juliet Macur makes me think that the good ol' boys from Texas have decided to throw Weisel under the bus. They are circling the wagons to save themselves.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/15/sports/cycling/lance-armstrong-admits-doping-and-says-he-will-testify-against-cycling-officials.html?hp&_r=1&

He is also in discussions with the United States Department of Justice to possibly testify in a federal whistleblower case against several team owners, including the investment banker Thom Weisel, and other team officials of the cycling squad that was sponsored by the United States Postal Service team in the mid-to-late 1990s and early 2000s, one person close to the situation said. That person did not want his name published because the case is still open.

Floyd Landis, one of Armstrong’s former teammates, filed the whistleblower case in 2010 against Armstrong and other principals of the Postal Service team on which he and Armstrong competed together for several years. Landis claimed that team defrauded the government because its riders used performance-enhancing drugs that were forbidden in its main sponsorship contract.

Now Armstrong and possibly his longtime agent, Bill Stapleton, are seeking to repay several millions of dollars of the more than $30 million the Postal Service spent on sponsoring the team, as part of their cooperation as witnesses in the case, said the person with knowledge of the matter. The Department of Justice is considering whether to join the case as a plaintiff and is close to making that decision, the person said.
If Lance is ready to throw Weasel under the bus now (when only money is at stake), why wouldn't Lance throw Weasel under the bus (when money AND prison time were at stake)?
 
MarkvW said:
If Lance is ready to throw Weasel under the bus now (when only money is at stake), why wouldn't Lance throw Weasel under the bus (when money AND prison time were at stake)?
The end game back then was not clear. He still had cards to play and he had always been lucky.
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
Oldman said:
Take triple damages for USPS, the SCA case, Times case, whoever else is in the wings and you'll have a good idea that he's got few choices. Oh; and there's that niggling possibility that this could blow into a criminal perjury action.
The toilets are flushing overtime at T.Weisel Securities.
South Australian government is on the band wagon. Asking for their TDU money back.

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling/sa-to-ask-armstrong-for-its-money-back-20130115-2cr24.html
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS