Urine Trouble

[frenchfry]

Not exactly. The only person saying this is a corrupt lawyer paid $600,000 by the UCI to say it. The experts (WADA, LNDD, AFLD, 2 Members of UCI BioPassoport) agreed that there were no chain of custody issues.

Vjirman got 600K!!!! That must have been $1 each time Lancey-poo or the UCI cited his "investigative report" to dismiss the EPO laden samples.

 

[BotanyBay]

Damage his reputation w/ which demographic/target-group/audience? Hardly making any pronouncement on LA's legal/criminal liability here, but it bears mentioning that not all of the public thinks like The Clinic and there will certainly be not insignificant segments of the population that really don't care about whatever cheating they may be compelled to realize Lance engaged in, if such an allegation were to be proven in US court. This is America, man, where Michael Vick - who served 21 months in federal prison + 2 months home confinement - is now QB for the Philadelphia Eagles. That's a pretty exalted position position for a sportsman, as there are...what, 30 teams in the NFL?

The people who already think LA are guilty are still going to think he's guilty. The question is whether or not they're going to care enough to treat Armstrong differently than they would a post-prison Michael Vick.

The Clinic is not representative of the way in which John Q. Public thinks about someone in Lance Armstrong's position. Call it unfortunate or not, but it's reality.

Cycling is such a small sport relative to the NFL (even smaller on the national level) and yet Armstrong is bigger than someone like Vick (w/ respect to current and future notoriety amongst the American public) - I just don't see there being a worse public reaction to him for having committed fraud or tax evasion or whatever (should any of that be proven) than the reaction to Vick for having led a dog-fighting ring.

[note: in comparing Armstrong to Vick, I fully realize that there is no empirical methodology used here to rate them. I just cited Vick as a somewhat similar case, to some degree.]

End of the day, even if proven in US court to have committed a crime, I don't see Armstrong suffering any worse than Vick (and he's certainly in a better position financially, and w/ respect to interconnected web of vested interests backing him who aren't prepared to abandon him wholesale and will maintain at least a qualified support). Time will tell.

Lance is a future VH-1 special in the making. Right now, we're going through his "downfall" period. But Americans worship winners, and they particularly love to take past winners, see them fall, and then have them ascend back up to the top again. Of course, the "top" won't be a return to the athletic career. The top will be his next big movie or book thing. Just being back in America's good graces. He's an established celebrity now, so just "not being in trouble" anymore will be enough for most mainstream 'mericans. He'll probably dress-up his kids and write a book about fatherhood or something. Or perhaps he'll get up on stage with Joel Osteen (man, what a cash-cow that stuff is!).

Oprah will come out of retirement after her TV network collapses (a comeback story of her own), and one of her first guests will be the new, "humbled" Lance Armstrong. And this time, he''ll really REALLY care about cancer (wink).

 

[MD FACG FACP]

exactly...........one doper talking about another doper...........

classic isn't it?

+1

The word CHEATER needs to substituted for doper as well. And then to sell dope, and encourage others to use it. It's like asking Charles Manson for his opinion on murder.

 

[BotanyBay]

exactly...........one doper talking about another doper...........

classic isn't it?

I guess you could stand on your soapbox and shame any rider who adopts a policy of transparency into not speaking anymore, or you could open your ears and listen to what they have to say. You might actually learn something.

I've learned plenty by listening to people such as Joe (and others such as Decanio).

Shouting them down in shame doesn't do anything to help the situation. Same goes for "MD,FACG,FACP MD,FACG,FACP"

 

[Semper Fidelis]

What if the case is not about cheating other cheaters but cheating on taxes and cheating a non-profit?

You got a link for that?

Hey who was that politician from NYC that owes all them back taxes?

 

[Semper Fidelis]

exactly...........one doper talking about another doper...........

classic isn't it?

Take it easy with the personal hateraid. I thought his take on the general public opinion on LA is correct.

 

[MD FACG FACP]

I guess you could stand on your soapbox and shame any rider who adopts a policy of transparency into not speaking anymore, or you could open your ears and listen to what they have to say. You might actually learn something.

I've learned plenty by listening to people such as Joe (and others such as Decanio).

Shouting them down in shame doesn't do anything to help the situation. Same goes for "MD,FACG,FACP MD,FACG,FACP"[/

What have you learned "BotanyBayBotanyBay" ?

My point is I'm sure Joe and Lance hope Joe Public doesn't give them a second thought. Just like every criminal. What if the drugs Joe sold were bad and killed someone ? Did Joe run everything through QC ? I think not he wanted to make money just like every other drug dealer.

I applaud the local crack dealer for his transparency, I've learned a lot from him.

 

[MacRoadie]

What about the legal reality currently? Lower courts sided with Pharmstrong that are/were chain of custody issues with the 99 samples. Indeed the FDA has superior technology to the the circa 99-UCI but for a prosecutor to introduce a decade old sample stored in a foreign country with 10 year old protocols as evidence would be a act of magic or stupidity.

I must have missed that one. Cite?

 

[**Uru**]

And the value of 11.5 year old urine samples is what exactly? Even if a DNA test proves it is Lance's urine, can the lab prove the samples sat unchanged during this time?

I think it is a stretch to think the samples represent anything of note for the FDA. At best, if they believe the samples were his, and these samples contained EPO that was in the urine at the time of the initial controls, then it means they need to look at what else he was doing that would tie him to illegal aquisition or distribution of controlled drugs during that timeframe. If they are then able to connect the dots to crimes that were committed during that time, and that the statute of limitations has not expired, then it would be exciting. Otherwise, it is a waste of time to think about.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I must have missed that one. Cite?

I believe he is speaking of the Public Strategies driven Court of Public Opinion.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Disagree

For the casual fan, or those that only get a cycling update from Sports Center during the tour or any time some one is caught/aquitted of doping, some of the opinion about Lance will depend on the upcomming trials of both Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds. It will be interesting to see the coverage there. That will have a direct effect on the coverage of Lance and his possible trial, and how everyone will view him long term.

This association with Clemens/Bonds to Armstrong is false.

Clemens/Bonds have, to some degree, MLB behind them managing to keep the story focused on those two. MLB can keep the doping in baseball story from spinning wildly out of control. USAC can't do the same. UCI can't either.

Notice none of the Congress critters bothered to bring Bonds/Clemens on very serious and patently obvious Federal charges of lying to Congress. It is the political equivalent of attacking America's pastime, baseball. Cycling? No such luxury.

More importantly, the allegations made in the SI article suggest felonies way, way beyond denying doping in front of Congress and then getting caught.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I must have missed that one. Cite?

It was the lower courts Mac.............

 

[mmedeast]

This association with Clemens/Bonds to Armstrong is false.

Clemens/Bonds have, to some degree, MLB behind them managing to keep the story focused on those two. MLB can keep the doping in baseball story from spinning wildly out of control. USAC can't. UCI can't.

Notice none of the Congress critters bothered to bring Bonds/Clemens on very serious and patently obvious Federal charges of lying to Congress. It is the political equivalent of attacking America's pastime, baseball. Cycling? No such luxury.

More importantly, the allegations made in the SI article suggest felonies way, way beyond denying doping in front of Congress and then getting caught.

People here may see it as false, but the average public won't most likely. It will depend on how it is presented. If it is presented as a doping story (which most mainstream outlets have portrayed it as, at least as the headline), then it will be tied to Clemmons and Bonds. If it is portrayed as a criminal investigation into fraud, then it may not be. This is a possible spin angle for the defense by the way, make it a doping witch hunt and it becomes a non-story - Just one more doper in the professional athletes category, surprise surprise.

The only other angle from the stand point of it being a fraud charge is "You have to be kidding me, we are spending time going after 10 mil (or what ever the number is) from 10 years ago, but we let one of the prime players (Angelo Mozila from Countrywide Financial) for the financial downfall skate? What a joke."

 

[BotanyBay]

I guess you could stand on your soapbox and shame any rider who adopts a policy of transparency into not speaking anymore, or you could open your ears and listen to what they have to say. You might actually learn something.

I've learned plenty by listening to people such as Joe (and others such as Decanio).

Shouting them down in shame doesn't do anything to help the situation. Same goes for "MD,FACG,FACP MD,FACG,FACP"[/

What have you learned "BotanyBayBotanyBay" ?

My point is I'm sure Joe and Lance hope Joe Public doesn't give them a second thought. Just like every criminal. What if the drugs Joe sold were bad and killed someone ? Did Joe run everything through QC ? I think not he wanted to make money just like every other drug dealer.

I applaud the local crack dealer for his transparency, I've learned a lot from him.

You initially chose the words "CHEATER", not "Drug Dealer", so you need to pick which soapbox you're standing on.

If people like Joe and Decanio (and a handful of others) had simply waited-out their suspensions, all we'd know is that there is a "doping problem". We'd have fewer tools available to fight the doping. More riders now get caught as a result of the knowledge base that's been provided.

 

[MD FACG FACP]

And the value of 11.5 year old urine samples is what exactly? Even if a DNA test proves it is Lance's urine, can the lab prove the samples sat unchanged during this time?

I think it is a stretch to think the samples represent anything of note for the FDA. At best, if they believe the samples were his, and these samples contained EPO that was in the urine at the time of the initial controls, then it means they need to look at what else he was doing that would tie him to illegal aquisition or distribution of controlled drugs during that timeframe. If they are then able to connect the dots to crimes that were committed during that time, and that the statute of limitations has not expired, then it would be exciting. Otherwise, it is a waste of time to think about.

So by your theory no urine, or blood samples are reliable because they all could have been tampered with. For that matter all evidence is worthless unless the prosecution can prove it "sat unchanged".

 

[offbyone]

This is being talked about in an existing thread (or threads) but I would like to request that this thread remain up on it's own on the strength of the title.

lol agreed.


1)Does the statute of limitations come into play on 12 year old samples?

2)So, the afld can't retest but they are allowed to turn the samples over to another organization/country to retest?

3)True or not, there is a lot of controversy surrounding those samples and it will be hard to make them credible.

 

[DirtyWorks]

What about the legal reality currently? Lower courts sided with Pharmstrong that are/were chain of custody issues with the 99 samples.

Bzzt! Wrong. Civil court. This is a Federal matter.

Indeed the FDA has superior technology to the the circa 99-UCI but for a prosecutor to introduce a decade old sample stored in a foreign country with 10 year old protocols as evidence would be a act of magic or stupidity.

Facts please. Are you a lawyer with experience in Federal courts? Specialization in the rules of evidence? Please, share. Otherwise this is more denial.

.... Even basics are not observed..can't wait to see the urine vault paperwork examined by a paid expert

Prosecution's expert will enhance their case. Defense's expert works to enhance their case. That's assuming it gets as far as a trial.

Dear Americans, we spent $?$?, millions of your dollars verifying that ex bicycle racer Lance Armstrong used drugs while racing his bike.

So, it's okay to use controlled substances, WAY outside their intended use and the medical field now? It's okay to distribute controlled substances too? It's okay to require others to break laws in order to remain employed?

You approve of all of those things because it was okay for team Pharmstrong. Please join me in making my first USD$ 100 million doing all of those things. Our first products will be the latest EPO equivalents, and a buffet of steroid patches. The venture capital world will be our first stop and our first USD$ 5 million. One time offer. Act now. What's stopping you? Not the law.

 

[Lurker]

I guess you could stand on your soapbox and shame any rider who adopts a policy of transparency into not speaking anymore, or you could open your ears and listen to what they have to say. You might actually learn something.

I've learned plenty by listening to people such as Joe (and others such as Decanio).

Shouting them down in shame doesn't do anything to help the situation. Same goes for "MD,FACG,FACP MD,FACG,FACP"[/

What have you learned "BotanyBayBotanyBay" ?

My point is I'm sure Joe and Lance hope Joe Public doesn't give them a second thought. Just like every criminal. What if the drugs Joe sold were bad and killed someone ? Did Joe run everything through QC ? I think not he wanted to make money just like every other drug dealer.

I applaud the local crack dealer for his transparency, I've learned a lot from him.

Comparing Joe Papp to a crack dealer is offensive because it flippantly degrades someone who has acknowledged his past indiscretions, is very knowledgeable about drug problems in cycling and who has apparently turned his life toward helping deal with those problems.

You apparently believe that the police shouldn't use reformed crack dealers to learn about drug culture. The police should ignore all criminal sources of information about crime. They should never use information from the mob to better understand organized crime. They shouldn't interview people like Ted Bundy to study serial killers.

If your logic is going to be this bad, please try not to be so rude.

 

[Race Radio]

lol agreed.


1)Does the statute of limitations come into play on 12 year old samples?

2)So, the afld can't retest but they are allowed to turn the samples over to another organization/country to retest?

3)True or not, there is a lot of controversy surrounding those samples and it will be hard to make them credible.

SOL is a canard. As long as the conspiracy to cover up the act continued, which it did, the SOL does not start until last year.

AFLD can retest, they would just have trouble sanctioning

The only controversy surrounding the samples was invented by the scam report put out by the UCI. Multiple experts agree that there is nothing wrong with the samples or testing

 

[MD FACG FACP]

You initially chose the words "CHEATER", not "Drug Dealer", so you need to pick which soapbox you're standing on.

If people like Joe and Decanio (and a handful of others) had simply waited-out their suspensions, all we'd know is that there is a "doping problem". We'd have fewer tools available to fight the doping. More riders now get caught as a result of the knowledge base that's been provided.

He dealt drugs and cheated, so you figure it out.

As far as soapbox is concerned. An internet forum is a soapbox for everyone that participates including you. Ironic.

 

[fatandfast]

I must have missed that one. Cite?

Judge Adolph Canales (Dallas) dismissed findings that LA was gassed.

Vrijman's report cleared Armstrong when it was used for WADA, LNDD,IOC when they wanted to snag Lancelot. Manrod Pound lost his chit when he read the findings. . Lance is slippery without question. I hope Novitzky has some kind of way back machine or starfish technology because Armstrong does..look at his life after Kistin..look at the 3rd place....Kimmage book this guy can survive radioactivity for breakfast..I wouldn't be surprised if LA is consultant for the sci fi show V

 

[Semper Fidelis]

SOL is a canard. As long as the conspiracy to cover up the act continued, which it did, the SOL does not start until last year.

AFLD can retest, they would just have trouble sanctioning

The only controversy surrounding the samples was invented by the scam report put out by the UCI. Multiple experts agree that there is nothing wrong with the samples or testing

Multiple experts who are independent?
I am sure LA will have multiple experts who will agree that the samples are unreliable.

 

[Cimacoppi49]

The visit of US investigators was well done. They were apparently asking questions and gathering potential trial evidence of different types. They probably asked to see the chain of custody as it exists at the French lab for Armstrong's, and perhaps other rider's, samples from 1999 and later. They would not go the Letters Rogatory route unless they were satisfied there are no chain of custody problems.

It appears the Letters Rogatory process was started soon after their return to the US. I've done one Letter Rogatory in a civil case through diplomatic channels. It took about 7 months to effect service of the materials in Germany. My understanding is that in criminal matters, the process is now much quicker as the offices of Interpol are used.

If the AUSA obtains and tests urine and blood samples for Armstrong and his teammates from every tour they rode for Postal, there could be an avalanche of incriminating evidence produced at trial in this country. It looks like finally the **** is hitting the fan, despite the PR presented via the AP article of a couple of weeks ago questioning whether Armstrong would ever be indicted.

 

[Je ne sais quoi]

I look at these samples as a hole card in the Perjury poker game. It doesn't even matter whether there is any intention to test them at this point. Now all it takes is one simple question under oath, and they become the crucible against which Armstrong measures the possibility of prison time.

What if they did the same thing with a few other peoples' samples? (Thinking of some of the potentially uncooperative witnesses who are fully supported by the Armstrong legal team, such as Hincapie).

 

[BotanyBay]

SOL is a canard. As long as the conspiracy to cover up the act continued, which it did, the SOL does not start until last year.

AFLD can retest, they would just have trouble sanctioning

The only controversy surrounding the samples was invented by the scam report put out by the UCI. Multiple experts agree that there is nothing wrong with the samples or testing

Forgive my non-scientist brain here, but can identity be determined from urine samples via DNA testing, etc?