US prosecutors drop case against Armstrong/USPS

[Velodude]

<snip> So there is no possibility of a successful civil action. Of course, we don't know what criminal activities may have taken place, although in my opinion, nothing credible has been suggested. Selling team bicycles is not a crime. Money laundering of course is, but paying for a "program" probably wasn't done so directly.

The Trek team bicycles title were with Tailwind & associates. (Trek admitted Feds had paid a visit and claimed Tailwind arrangement was amended in 2007)

Landis claimed sale of team bikes was part of the dope funding. Obviously funds from sales not accounted to Tailwind (as owner of US Postal team) and Tailwind would have filed income tax returns understating income - income tax evasion.

There also been a lot of talk about whether Armstrong was a director, or if he lied about his ownership. I think most of this talk stems from posters who aren't aware of the differences between large publicly held companies and small privately held companies. In a small private corporation, the investors typically get preferred stock, and the management/talent are granted common stock or more commonly options for common stock. Only the preferred stock holders have voting rights, and the votes are apportioned according to the investment percentage. I certainly don't know, but a good guess is that Thom Weisel held >51% of Tailwind, or controlled a parent shell corporation that held >51%. In that case, for nearly all decisions, excepting modifications to the corporate charter, he would hold complete power. Again, I don't know about Tailwind, but I do know about private corporations. Contrary to public companies, a board seat need not confer any power or knowledge of the operations

Armstrong would likely have not invested (much) money, but he could easily have had options with an "earn out" provision. That is, his share of ownership might change depending on the level of profit in a given year, or on the value of Tailwind at the time of a liquidity event. These provisions are common, and so the question "what percentage do you own" is not directly answerable. I was involved in one such arrangement in which the formula for earn out was sufficiently complicated that about 2 hours was needed to explain it.

The class of shares is not an issue. Armstrong was a director of Tailwind as filed documents evidence. RICO, which the Feds were reaching for, applies to all "members" of an enterprise.

 

[Cal_Joe]

An interesting op/ed piece in Cyclismas - http://cyclismas.com/2012/02/from-the-oped-department-armstrong-case-closed-the-right-decision/

 

[Velodude]

That would seem to imply thatthis contract of Jan 1 , 2001 was superseded. Do you have a link to the newer contact? Or if not, can you quote the full sentence that says what (4) is referring to?

This is the clause in a contract that was PDF'D by ESPN:

"The Company represents that each rider on the Team has a morals turpitude and drug clause that allows the Company to suspend or terminate the rider for cause which shall include items such as (1) conviction of a felony; (2) acts that require the Team to suspend or terminate the rider under the applicable rules of the Union Cycliste Internationale, the Federation Interationale du Cyclisme Professionel; the United States Professional Cycling Federation, Inc; the International Olympic Committee; the International Amateur Cycling Federation; the United States Cycling Federation and all other applicable governing organizations; (3) failure to pass drug or medical tests; (4) inappropriate drug conduct prejudicial to the Team, or the Postal Service, which is in violation of the Team rules or commonly accepted standards of morality; and (5) gross neglect of the rider's duty."

 

[MarkvW]

The Trek team bicycles title were with Tailwind & associates. (Trek admitted Feds had paid a visit and claimed Tailwind arrangement was amended in 2007)

Landis claimed sale of team bikes was part of the dope funding. Obviously funds from sales not accounted to Tailwind (as owner of US Postal team) and Tailwind would have filed income tax returns understating income - income tax evasion.



The class of shares is not an issue. Armstrong was a director of Tailwind as filed documents evidence. RICO, which the Feds were reaching for, applies to all "members" of an enterprise.

The class of shares would OBVIOUSLY have been an issue. Some shares vote; others have no power to do anything. Arguing that a mere shareholder with no power to direct company business is somehow liable for actions taken by a company flies right in the face of the whole reason why we have limited liability companies.

Care to back up your RICO statements with a textual analysis of the statute?

 

[KingsMountain]

Yep, that's the 2001 contract. Note that it doesn't restrain the riders from doping; it only says that Tailwind had to have rider contracts that would allow (but not necessarily require) Tailwind to suspend or fire the rider if any of the various conditions occurred. Doping by itself, even if discovered, would not be sufficient. The act would have needed to be prejudicial to USPS or Tailwind.

In the part of the contract detailing the conditions for default, the team is required to take "appropriate action". The remedy if Tailwind did not take appropriate action would be for USPS to make a claim for damages. USPS did not make such a claim-understandably, because no doping came to light during the term of the contract.

By definition, no default occurred.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

I've been here a long time, and actually have a personal interest in the outcome as I have friends directly affected by the whole sordid mess. I had an interest in the outcome (and a desire to see justice served where proven) even before this forum was created.

I haven't "fallen" for anything, but thanks for wandering in at the eleventh hour to set us all straight.

My post is directed at all the idiotic prognostication, "guarantees", deadlines, "insider scoops", and so-called personal knowledge that a select few individuals have polluted the forum with as this matter has progressed over the last two years. Rabid speculation rather than patience in a vacuum of concrete data flows from both sides.

The one-upmanship and desire to prove the "fanboys' wrong at all costs has allowed what started as a measured analysis of what COULD happen to Armstrong under various intelligent scenarios, to devolve into utter buffoonery and wild speculation passed off as fact. That served no purpose other than to undermine any rationality and credibility of more measured and conservative opinions on the possible (rather than likely) outcome.

Hell, you can't even mention the word "Tuesday" without eliciting a round of guffaws (that is if you can even use it with a straight face).

Yes, the "haters" and "fanboys", especially those on the fanatic extremes, have become barely distinguishable. That's not my fault, both sides can blame themselves. I see equally stupid comments, insults, and reliance on absolutes fabricated from whole cloth emanating from both sides.

To suggest that the rational and intellectual high ground (setting aside right and wrong, correct or incorrect) is the providence of one side or the other, especially at this point in time, is utterly ignorant.

You didn't think Armstrong was going to roll over, did you?

The "fans" and Armstrong's lawyers,have muddied the waters and you've bought into it.

There's not one bit of speculation you've addressed made by LA's accusers other than chronological guesses which may have been incorrect.

ALL of the other accusations have been borne out for the most part. It's even been worse than originally suspected.

This thing has been political, not legal, since it started. Armstrong correctly saw that and did everything he could to play the system.

He was completely screwed until a political debt was paid off.

You of all people should realize that and also understand that NOTHING said here had any negative effect at all on the outcome.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

An interesting op/ed piece in Cyclismas - http://cyclismas.com/2012/02/from-the-oped-department-armstrong-case-closed-the-right-decision/

Yeah interesting read. But as many people involved in this case, he´s hiding behind paragraphs.

What we at least need is someone from the investigation with ball$ like the german state attorney who said "No doubt, Ullrich doped" (after the case against him was abandoned).

A quote like this "No doubt, all the evidence shown to GS indicates that Armstrong doped in years xy to win the TdF, thus cheating the public, cyling etc.! We just couldn´t indict him because of abc..." Novitskiy on June 23rd, 2012.

Soemthing like that would be enough for me. Armstrong forever tarnished.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

The class of shares would OBVIOUSLY have been an issue. Some shares vote; others have no power to do anything. Arguing that a mere shareholder with no power to direct company business is somehow liable for actions taken by a company flies right in the face of the whole reason why we have limited liability companies.

Care to back up your RICO statements with a textual analysis of the statute?

You won and you either don't know why you won or you're still fighting for some kind of agenda.

Birrotte said NO! That is all that matters. Give me the textual analysis of no.

Aside from that, Armstrong would be in prison.

You don't think Birotte is in his position due to his legal acumen, do you? He's there because he plays ball.

 

[mewmewmew13]

You didn't think Armstrong was going to roll over, did you?

The "fans" and Armstrong's lawyers,have muddied the waters and you've bought into it.

There's not one bit of speculation you've addressed made by LA's accusers other than chronological guesses which may have been incorrect.

ALL of the other accusations have been borne out for the most part. It's even been worse than originally suspected.

This thing has been political, not legal, since it started. Armstrong correctly saw that and did everything he could to play the system.

He was completely screwed until a political debt was paid off.

You of all people should realize that and also understand that NOTHING said here had any negative effect at all on the outcome.

Correction.
Armstrong himself probably did not see this.

Remember how much money he has spent on legal counsel...

 

[MarkvW]

You won and you either don't know why you won or you're still fighting for some kind of agenda.

Birrotte said NO! That is all that matters. Give me the textual analysis of no.

Aside than that, Armstrong would be in prison.

You don't think Birotte is in his position due to his legal acumen, do you? He's there because he plays ball.

Ah, but you still haven't told me how Cameron Diaz and Eddy Merckx fit into the Birotte Conspiracy. Maybe they're responsible . . .

 

[MacRoadie]

You didn't think Armstrong was going to roll over, did you?

The "fans" and Armstrong's lawyers,have muddied the waters and you've bought into it.

There's not one bit of speculation you've addressed made by LA's accusers other than chronological guesses which may have been incorrect.

ALL of the other accusations have been borne out for the most part. It's even been worse than originally suspected.

This thing has been political, not legal, since it started. Armstrong correctly saw that and did everything he could to play the system.

He was completely screwed until a political debt was paid off.

You of all people should realize that and also understand that NOTHING said here had any negative effect at all on the outcome.

Ok, now I see why others get so frustrated with you. Apparently you have a difficult time understanding.

I'm not talking about the outcome, I'm talking about the idiots on here, on their own merit (or lack thereof). If my disdain for the stupidity expressed by posters on both sides of the argument hits a bit close to home, then so be it.

No one muddied any water for me. I was aware of much of the subject matter and the persons involved long before most of you had bought your first yellow wristband or ridden your first Cat 5 race.

Would I like to see justice served? Of course. Do I like the guy? Absolutely not. Did he dope? Of course he did. Do I know jack-all about what actually happened? No, and neither does anyone else here, you included.

Regardless of everyone's ignorance, the wild speculation and hyperbole still continues.

What was said here DID have a negative effect on my opinion of the people posting the drivel. The people who's goal morphed from wanting to see justice served into simply wanting to prove a "fanboy' wrong, or create a more fantastic scenario in the "name the indictments" game. It also had an effect on my desire to go elsewhere to escape the mindless back-and-forth.

Again, don't try thinking for me or even trying to assume my motivations or relationships/loyalties. If it's any indication of your speculative abilities, or your self-professed deductive prowess, then I can assure you it is far less proficient than advertised.

 

[Velodude]

The class of shares would OBVIOUSLY have been an issue. Some shares vote; others have no power to do anything. Arguing that a mere shareholder with no power to direct company business is somehow liable for actions taken by a company flies right in the face of the whole reason why we have limited liability companies.

Care to back up your RICO statements with a textual analysis of the statute?

Suggest you analyze the terse statement by the US Attorney last Friday

U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. stated in a press release that his office “is closing an investigation into allegations of federal criminal conduct by members and associates of a professional bicycle racing team owned in part by Lance Armstrong.”

Obviously the Feds were pursuing Armstrong based on his beneficial interest (through shareholding) or control (through directorship) of a corporation which was involved in conduct that attracted the RICO legislation. Appears they chose ownership.

The legislation does not require that beneficial interest to be a controlling interest through weight of holding and/or rights attached to various classes of shares.

"It shall be unlawful for any person through a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce."

I would doubt because of the simplicity of that clause of the legislation that there would exist no precedents disputing a level of interest required to be part of a RICO criminal enterprise.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

An interesting op/ed piece in Cyclismas - http://cyclismas.com/2012/02/from-the-oped-department-armstrong-case-closed-the-right-decision/

Interesting how?

The only people who had access to the information determined and felt in their professional legal opinion that they did not have enough to move forward to indict or even convict Lance Armstrong in the federal court of law.

People? Their? They?

Did Cyclismas happen to be awake for the news that one guy shut down the case over the objections of the actual prosecutors who were going to try it?

 

[patricknd]

So pulling the team bus over so everyone can take a transfusion is not "inappropriate drug conduct prejudicial to the team"?

USPS put these clauses into the agreement to insure they are not damaged. It does not matter if that damage comes during the contract term or after

i guess it's not detrimental if you don't get caught

 

[BotanyBay]

You don't think Birotte is in his position due to his legal acumen, do you? He's there because he plays ball.

Agreed.

Birotte is an Obama political-cronie-appointee. And while he had previously prosecuted cases, and he was the inspector-general for the LAPD, he is by no means a life-long prosecutor. He's a ladder-climber.

Favors are being worked here. This is no different than the kind of "horse trading" that goes on in regards to legislative issues on Capitol Hill.

Either Birotte is doing some horse trading of his own, or he's being a good soldier for people up above him. Think about it. He was born in Newark NJ. Not the world's best neighborhood. He's a classic "kid from the ghetto" success story. He's grooming himself for a big appointment. And he's also being groomed by others for such an appointment. This could be as simple as wanting to keep his head down low on a divisive issue (Wunderboy's guilt or innocence) during a season that could fundamentally result in his reaching the "big time". I'm talking either federal judge material or higher-level administration material. Birotte is a player now.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

Ok, now I see why others get so frustrated with you. Apparently you have a difficult time understanding.

I'm not talking about the outcome, I'm talking about the idiots on here, on their own merit (or lack thereof). If my disdain for the stupidity expressed by posters on both sides of the argument hits a bit close to home, then so be it.

No one muddied any water for me. I was aware of much of the subject matter and the persons involved long before most of you had bought your first yellow wristband or ridden your first Cat 5 race.

Would I like to see justice served? Of course. Do I like the guy? Absolutely not. Did he dope? Of course he did. Do I know jack-all about what actually happened? No, and neither does anyone else here, you included.

Regardless of everyone's ignorance, the wild speculation and hyperbole still continues.

What was said here DID have a negative effect on my opinion of the people posting the drivel. The people who's goal morphed from wanting to see justice served into simply wanting to prove a "fanboy' wrong, or create a more fantastic scenario in the "name the indictments" game. It also had an effect on my desire to go elsewhere to escape the mindless back-and-forth.

Again, don't try thinking for me or even trying to assume my motivations or relationships/loyalties. If it's any indication of your speculative abilities, or your self-professed deductive prowess, then I can assure you it is far less proficient than advertised.

The only portion of what you wrote that has any relevance whatsoever is the bolded part where you contradict yourself one sentence after another.

We know he doped, and we know what happened. It doesn't get any more simple than that.

If you want to believe there are complicated issues and confusion to be able to swallow the fact that Armstrong got away with this crap, what can I say?

The facts are very uncomplicated though and almost everyone here knows what they are.

 

[BotanyBay]

In other words, who wants to be the man stuck with the job of prosecuting Santa Claus a few days before Xmas? (See Miracle on 34th street for reference)

 

[MarkvW]

Yeah interesting read. But as many people involved in this case, he´s hiding behind paragraphs.

What we at least need is someone from the investigation with ball$ like the german state attorney who said "No doubt, Ullrich doped" (after the case against him was abandoned).

A quote like this "No doubt, all the evidence shown to GS indicates that Armstrong doped in years xy to win the TdF, thus cheating the public, cyling etc.! We just couldn´t indict him because of abc..." Novitskiy on June 23rd, 2012.

Soemthing like that would be enough for me. Armstrong forever tarnished.

But it is too unfair (and illegal) to treat people like that! Even people as offensive as Armstrong. Armstrong, like any person before a GJ, can't defend himself and can't even get access to the GJ documents.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

Ah, but you still haven't told me how Cameron Diaz and Eddy Merckx fit into the Birotte Conspiracy. Maybe they're responsible . . .

You brought that ignorance up as a joke to cover up your intentional clouding of the issues with legal minutiae that's actually been shown to be wrong.

You're the one still arguing legal issues anyway. They do not matter.

 

[VeloCity]

So when do you suppose SCA comes knocking on the Feds door for evidence that Armstrong lied in his deposition?

 

[Velodude]

Yep, that's the 2001 contract. Note that it doesn't restrain the riders from doping; it only says that Tailwind had to have rider contracts that would allow (but not necessarily require) Tailwind to suspend or fire the rider if any of the various conditions occurred. Doping by itself, even if discovered, would not be sufficient. The act would have needed to be prejudicial to USPS or Tailwind.

In the part of the contract detailing the conditions for default, the team is required to take "appropriate action". The remedy if Tailwind did not take appropriate action would be for USPS to make a claim for damages. USPS did not make such a claim-understandably, because no doping came to light during the term of the contract.

By definition, no default occurred.

You are only expressing a personal opinion from what you are reading into the contract. And that opinion may be based on bias.

Obviously as this clause in the contract was the sole genesis of US government agencies and the USPS investigators initiating an investigation or moving the focus of a then current investigation on to Lance Armstrong then there are skilled and experienced professionals who would disagree with your view.

 

[MarkvW]

Yeah interesting read. But as many people involved in this case, he´s hiding behind paragraphs.

What we at least need is someone from the investigation with ball$ like the german state attorney who said "No doubt, Ullrich doped" (after the case against him was abandoned).

A quote like this "No doubt, all the evidence shown to GS indicates that Armstrong doped in years xy to win the TdF, thus cheating the public, cyling etc.! We just couldn´t indict him because of abc..." Novitskiy on June 23rd, 2012.

Soemthing like that would be enough for me. Armstrong forever tarnished.

Suggest you analyze the terse statement by the US Attorney last Friday



Obviously the Feds were pursuing Armstrong based on his beneficial interest (through shareholding) or control (through directorship) of a corporation which was involved in conduct that attracted the RICO legislation. Appears they chose ownership.

The legislation does not require that beneficial interest to be a controlling interest through weight of holding and/or rights attached to various classes of shares.



I would doubt because of the simplicity of that clause of the legislation that there would exist no precedents disputing a level of interest required to be part of a RICO criminal enterprise.

Start thinking about the "pattern of racketeering activity."

 

[LarryBudMelman]

You are only expressing a personal opinion from what you are reading into the contract. And that opinion may be based on bias.

Obviously as this clause in the contract was the sole genesis of US government agencies and the USPS investigators initiating an investigation or moving the focus of a then current investigation on to Lance Armstrong then there are skilled and experienced professionals who would disagree with your view.

What bothers me most is that someone with expertise in these matters can be overridden with a simple no, by a person, or people with obviously less expertise.

Political decisions. No justice because of politics.

 

[mewmewmew13]

The only portion of what you wrote that has any relevance whatsoever is the bolded part where you contradict yourself one sentence after another.

We know he doped, and we know what happened. It doesn't get any more simple than that.

If you want to believe there are complicated issues and confusion to be able to swallow the fact that Armstrong got away with this crap, what can I say?

The facts are very uncomplicated though and almost everyone here knows what they are.

I'm not sure why you suddenly decided that you were going to become a 'spokesperson' for the entire forum on this issue.

The tone and attitude that comes out of your posts sounds more like personal challenges and taunting and are not productive or contributing in any positive manner.

Your qualifiers of 'Almost everyone here' and 'we know what happened' don't tend to put you in a position of high esteem by some posters who have been here a long time.
I also don't think it is wise to declare that "the facts are very uncomplicated though...blah blah..."

I , for one, would appreciate it if you would please express your own opinions succinctly and leave it at that.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

I'm not sure why you suddenly decided that you were going to become a 'spokesperson' for the entire forum on this issue.

The tone and attitude that comes out of your posts sounds more like personal challenges and taunting and are not productive or contributing in any positive manner.

Your qualifiers of 'Almost everyone here' and 'we know what happened' don't tend to put you in a position of high esteem by some posters who have been here a long time.
I also don't think it is wise to declare that "the facts are very uncomplicated though...blah blah..."

I , for one, would appreciate it if you would please express your own opinions succinctly and leave it at that.

I'm not concerned about what position I'm held in TBH.

Just look at the facts. They're obvious.