SpartacusRox said:
Agreed, plus there are many on here who are more than a little ignorant of investigative process. Any Federal investigation is in its very early stages and talk of Armstrong being arrested if he returns to the US or feds kicking in doors are just plain dumb and are written by people who think CSI is reality TV.
It is very accurate that generally, US Federal investigations move slowly. There are some considerations as to timing, since many investigations into criminal activity can cross the balance between public safety and allowing a criminal to continue unabated. Permitting the current target to perform in his chosen profession does not pose a risk to public safety and gathering of additional information could mean much to be gained. As a matter of timing, when was the last time you saw something escalate from leaked emails, to a Fed agent getting involved to a US Attorney being named prosecutor? I take it from extremely reliable sources that many of the named, and others, have wasted no time in offering up information. The notion that any of them rate their loyalty to their current or onetime boss over freedom is asinine.
SpartacusRox said:
Even if he does become the main focus of the investigation, there is no rush to interview him and in fact it could be be counterproductive to do so as the investigators would want to sift through as much information as is available before talking to him. This will probably take many months and numerous meetings with lawyers regarding relevancy and veracity before an actual interview with LA takes place, if it does at all.
Well, if not him, then who? It would seem the targets are easy to figure: Lance, Weisel, Stapleton, Knaggs, Bruyneel, ie the organizers and direct beneficiaries of the purported fraud. Again, I agree there is no rush to examine or question him. It could take many months to fully build their case and present to a Grand Jury. Probably do not need to even talk to them before then. Once a charge(s) are filed, then the questioning can get underway.
SpartacusRox said:
I wouldn't read too much into the silence aspect because that could be due to the fact that at the moment they will just be gathering information and assessing it to see if there is stuff worth pursuing.
Let me rephrase that for you:
...they are gathering information that will be used for a successful indictment.
The writing is on the wall and the information is out there. The person to kick a hole in the dam, did, and it is knee deep sluice in Armstrongburg.
SpartacusRox said:
As far as the TdF is concerned there is and will be no reason why Armstrong will not attend from a legal perspective. Talk about him not racing from a form perspective is just usual drivel from the usual suspects on here, who change tack like the wind as situations resolve to prove them to be incorrect.
I concede it is entirely possible that Lance races the Tour. I just highly doubt it. The risks to the ASO and their grand property, the risk to a sponsor like Radioshack, the risk to the UCI... they all need to find a diplomatic reason, one that does not look judgmental, but one that is just following their "policies", so that they can sweep this ugliness aside and have a generally scandal free July.
As full disclaimer, I have no vested interest in any potential outcome. I appreciated Lance for his racing style. I am more intrigued with the legal issues present and have the majority of this on good information. Patience.
I imagine significant details will burst this week. The appetite for destruction of a media/cultural demi-god is not easily sated. Gotta keep throwing some chum in the water or the public sharks will disperse.
)
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram