UCI, McQuaid & Verbruggen in lawsuit against Landis

[MarkvW]

NO!!!!

I'd happily stump up some cash to help Floyds defence.

Don't do it! He's already defrauded contributors once. He could use your money to settle and you'd feel horribly used--AGAIN!

Let Floyd put up or shut up. Let him bear the consequences of his actions. The man is a total weasel. Filthy unrepentant doping slime.

 

[orbeas]

The UCU v Landis

Anyone here has any understanding of Swiss defamation law?

Anyway, I guess the case is quite useless, mostly due to the fact that it would probably be difficult to ensure execution of the verdict in the US, and even if it succeeded, how would Landis be able to pay the damages?

If I remember correctly the writer Andrew Jennings who wrote various books about the corruption in the IOC, sound familiar in the UCI ???, was found guilty of the same thing that McQuaid and his mafia are trying for to get Landis for and was given a jail sentance.
It is only legal in Switzerland which means that Jennings cannot return to Switzerland and if Landis losses he will not be able to return or suffer arrest.
No doubt Messrs McQuaid and Verbruggen have judges in Switxerland who they can pay off to fix the verdict.
As Landis is an American why dont they take the case to the USA ?????

I'd donate to take on those UCI txxxts !!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Granville57]

CN picks up the story

More coverage from Velonation

 

[Zweistein]

The end game is to discredit Floyd by breaking him financially by just keeping the case going any number of ways. He capitulates and Pat and Hein get to write the press release that puts the UCI in the most favorable light. This is a very common tactic in the U.S.

If I were the Pat and Hein, the complaint is structured such that Pat and Hein's affairs do not intersect with the complaint. It would be fun if Swiss law allowed the complaint to expand in an effort to collect evidence for both parties. Any Swiss litigators care to weigh in?

You can't break someone who is broke. You can't blackball someone who clearly already doesn't care. Capitulate, for what?

 

[MarkvW]

an expectancy

But if Floyd doesn't have any finances (as we are led to believe), or just simply ignores them (or taunts through Grey Manrod), how can they break what is already "broken," if we assume the perspective of an unemployed, fringe, loose cannon?

How is this in any way "enforceable"?

Ah, but Floyd has an "expectancy" in the form of a megabucks qui tam lawsuit. A cause of action is personal property (a "chose in action"). It (the lawsuit) can be executed upon in the course of collecting a judgment.

This plays out in funny, and perhaps ironic, ways if the UCI wins.

 

[therealtimshady]

after years of turning a blind eye to any allegations involving armstrong (and still continue to do so) the UCI sue anyone who dare suggest that armstrong was doping - protected riders, maybe floyd was right after all

 

[Granville57]

Grey Manrod weighs in:

Anybody can SAY that they filed a lawsuit.
38 minutes ago via Twitter for iPhone

http://twitter.com/#!/GreyManrod/status/65799448088944640

 

[sniper]

One could try something like this:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/create.html

exactly, great link. now all we need is someone with enough time and engagement.

Unfortunately, I'm not in that position, right now. The engagement with Landis is there, but the time isn't.
I'll be the first to sign and spread the link, though.

 

[Benotti69]

Mcquaid and Vebruggen make Elmer Fudd and Foghorn Leghorn look like Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking

 

[Epicycle]

This isn't about Landis. This is about trying to plug other leaks on this sinking ship.

I'm sure Verbruggen's massive ego plays a part as well.

 

[skippy]

Verbruggen was a class act that makes "teflon coated" a great sales gimmick !

Torino Major was kind enough to greet me today when i arrived for my 13th riding of Giro d'Italioa for "Paralympic Sport" !

Checkout blogspots of Parrabuddy & TourdaFrance to stay abreast the action

 

[this_is_edie]

The endgame has nothing to do with covering up with positive tests or receiving damages. Its to flush out Floyd and for him to show what evidence he has. Theirs is no end game. Just tie the boy up in legal proceedings. Floyd will ignore this letter. The UCI have already had this action “out on the wire” with the headline “UCI sues Landis”. We all know its going no where. Its up to the UCI to prove that they’ve been damaged by the accusations. I’m not sure if Floyd has said anything which could be considered “damaging”. The UCI Is not a brand name. It doesn’t really sell a product per se. Has McQuaid been personally damaged by the accusations? I don’t think so. Has Hein? Potentially. But if he went to court he’d have to demonstrate how he has been damaged even when he’s no longer the President. Perhaps he didn’t take a bribe from Armstrong – it would be up for Floyd to prove that he did. Floyd would merely state what he heard from Armstrong – Do you think either party will call Armstrong to appear? Floyd may. Would he show? Of course not. This really won’t get any traction. I can see it burning up some time but that’s about it.

I have to agree with that sentence, because the suit makes no sense at all.

Of course, it's not the first time that the UCI/McQuaid have made no sense.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

What was it Pat was saying about his door is always open to whistleblowers?

I only hope that CN journalists will grow a set and start to call McQuaid on his bull****.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Does someone here have enough time and energy to write an official open letter of complaint against the UCI and in support of Landis (in his role as whistleblower), and put in on a website where cyclingfans can sign the letter?

The letter should complain about the lack of support Landis receives as a whistleblower.

Well, I put up this 'Open letter to Pat McQuaid' last year - their comments since have only added to the confusion.

Well, looks like Python spoke just a little too soon:

If this suit actually goes somewhere, maybe we will finally see the evidence that UCI really did cover up positive tests, or give warnings to riders about tests. Would love to see all that raked out into the open.

I have started a separate thread on this, but the UCI story Pat McQuaid told last year does not add up.

 

[DirtyWorks]

You can't break someone who is broke. You can't blackball someone who clearly already doesn't care. Capitulate, for what?

To write the history of the circumstances such that they favor the UCI. This is very important to any organization.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Not sure what the endgame is here.
How can the UCI leverage this in any positive way? ANY extra attention given to Floyd is only going to make them look bad. He has proven the ability to up the ante and take joy in gleefully humiliating them. Do they think something like this ridiculous "lawsuit" is going to squelch him?

The only thing that comes to mind is that LA & Co., or other concerned parties, could use any pending suit in their further attempts to discredit FLandis.
"Well, here's a guy who's currently involved in an international case against him...no credibility...blah, blah, blah..."

That's the only thing I can take away from this at the moment.

"Don't poke the crazy guy"
-Floyd

Maybe this is way off, but could LA & Co have had any hand in prodding the UCI sidekicks to go ahead with the smokescreen? It does help take some of the focus off....

 

[Anonymous]

The UCI have chosen switzerland purely because their case is full of holes

 

[Granville57]

Ah, but Floyd has an "expectancy" in the form of a megabucks qui tam lawsuit. A cause of action is personal property (a "chose in action"). It (the lawsuit) can be executed upon in the course of collecting a judgment.

This plays out in funny, and perhaps ironic, ways if the UCI wins.

I had definitely considered that, but there are a few factors at play.

1) People more familiar than I with the specifics of qui tam than I have suggested that it is not a foregone conclusion that Floyd will get any money. The whole process could've been put in play simply to ensure some forward momentum in the case.

2) If he does receive compensation, it could be a long way off.

3) (I find this to be the most relevant) If Floyd received money from the Feds, that would mean that money was to be had i.e. the Feds won a substantial case against LA & Co.

So where would that leave the UCI in the scheme of things?
If the Feds win, and Floyd wins, the UCI would have bigger problems of its own, and have a hard time pinning any damage to their image on Floyd when set against the backdrop of a significant legal defeat to their hero and formerly upstanding poster boy.

 

[sniper]

Well, I put up this 'Open letter to Pat McQuaid' last year - their comments since have only added to the confusion.

yeah, I remember, great stuff. thanks 4 da link.
If we could somehow get that into the format of a petition...
Anyway, I guess the focus in an open letter should be on Landis' role as a whistleblower, and why the UCI doesn't support him in that role.

 

[poupou]

wiki defense 2.0 / the come back

It's time to open a wiki defense !

and to launch a website called "Trust but verify" or better "Distrust UCI"

 

[MarkvW]

domesticating a judgment

Anyone here has any understanding of Swiss defamation law?

Anyway, I guess the case is quite useless, mostly due to the fact that it would probably be difficult to ensure execution of the verdict in the US, and even if it succeeded, how would Landis be able to pay the damages?

No knowledge of Swiss defamation law.

If they get a judgment, the first thing they'd do would be to domesticate the judgment in a state where Floyd or his assets were. Each state has laws that set the standards for the foreign nation judgments that they'll recognize (or not). Once the judgment is recognized by one state, it's recognized by all (Full Faith & Credit). Then things get quite normal with the uniform collection statutes.

As other posters have suggested, this could be an expensive tool if Floyd has no assets. But (a) the doper-liar is going to write another book; and (b) he's got a big lawsuit pending. Floyd has earning potential! A conspiracy theorist could also view this as an attempt to seize ownership of Floyd's qui tam lawsuit.

Floyd's probably got to defend this, or he'll get a default judgment against him. How can he afford to? Maybe Floyd Fairness Committee II?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Don't do it! He's already defrauded contributors once. He could use your money to settle and you'd feel horribly used--AGAIN!

Let Floyd put up or shut up. Let him bear the consequences of his actions. The man is a total weasel. Filthy unrepentant doping slime.

Ah, you're assuming anyone here was stupid enough to give to the FFF.

Amazing how the UCI said they would release documentation to support their case in the name of transparency yet never did. Instead they are trying to sue him (through the media) in an effort to silence him.

Ah, but Floyd has an "expectancy" in the form of a megabucks qui tam lawsuit. A cause of action is personal property (a "chose in action"). It (the lawsuit) can be executed upon in the course of collecting a judgment.

This plays out in funny, and perhaps ironic, ways if the UCI wins.

Whats funny is how you call Floyd a 'weasel' etc ..... and then say he has an 'expectancy' of megabucks - won't he only get paid if his story is true?

 

[El Oso]

I can't see how the Swiss courts would have jurisdiction in this case. The statements were made in the U.S. by a U.S. citizen. The UCI would have to bring the case in U.S. Federal Court. Since they are public figures US defamation law would not be on their side.

 

[Merckx index]

Why is UCI going after FL now? Floyd made these accusations nearly six months ago. Did it take UCI this long to determine that they had a case they thought they could win? Or as Hog claims, is this a way of finding out what Floyd will tell Novitzy? Possible that it has something to do with Floyd on 60 minutes?

The interesting thing to me is that there are four major anti-doping stories going on now:

1) the Armstrong investigation
2) the Contador case
3) the Italian investigation of Ferrari
4) UCI suit against Floyd

Though these are independent actions, the connections among them are obvious, particularly among 1), 3) and 4). Wrt Contador, when McQ initially rebutted Floyd last November, he offered the Contador case as evidence that UCI did not protect riders. Highly ironic, of course, given what we know about how that case was handled in its initial stages. One could even argue that this latest case could impact Bert's case, because if Bert gets off based on the evidence against him, a lot of people are going to complain that he was protected. Though UCI's appeal of the Spanish decision seems to indicate they are serious about suspending him, a statement that transfusion is not part of their case certainly gives one to wonder what they are up to.

 

[MarkvW]

Will the feds take the qui tam?

AFAIK, the feds haven't decided whether to take the qui tam. They're (maybe?) sitting on the fence, waiting to see if Novitsky digs anything up.

But from Floyd's POV, his potential future income streams are at risk. He can't play this like a kid saying outrageous things from his parents' basement. He's got to participate--but how can he afford to?

Granville's damages point is super spot on, but that's something Floyd will have to prove/disprove (at his expense). Otherwise, he's stuck.

The financial pressures on Floyd would tend to indicate an abject apology and payment of UCI et al's fees is forthcoming, but Floyd is a loose cannon.