US prosecutors drop case against Armstrong/USPS

[goober]

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?

'One' guy did not shut this down - many facts will come out soon...

 

[Velodude]

Start thinking about the "pattern of racketeering activity."

Only requires a breach of a minimum of two specified illegal activities defined within racketeering over a period to form a pattern for RICO.

“Those agencies reportedly only got about a half hour notice that the decision was going to be announced. And this was after there had been indications that prosecutors were preparing to indict Armstrong and others on federal crimes, including mail fraud, drug distribution, wire fraud, witness tampering.

By using "including" it is not exhaustive but you can add income tax evasion and money laundering as starters.

I would expect all those Federal crimes were consistent from 1999 to at least 2007. Except for witness tampering. We know of Tyler and ex PA Anderson but that could only be the tip of the iceberg given Armstrong's propensity for abusive conduct.

 

[MarkvW]

Only requires a breach of a minimum of two specified illegal activities defined within racketeering over a period to form a pattern for RICO.



By using "including" it is not exhaustive but you can add income tax evasion and money laundering as starters.

I would expect all those Federal crimes were consistent from 1999 to at least 2007. Except for witness tampering. We know of Tyler and ex PA Anderson but that could only be the tip of the iceberg given Armstrong's propensity for abusive conduct.

Good. Now you understand why you can't bootstrap "membership" to prove "pattern of racketeering activity."

You can't prove a RICO violation occurred. How can you suggest that the feds could?

 

[MarkvW]

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.

Yep. Because the case wasn't provable, and you can't prove otherwise.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

There has been a lot of criticism of Birotte as he ultimately was the one to make the announcement that the case was being pulled.

However - from the NPR piece:

And the person also said, while this announcement came quickly, the U.S. attorney André Birotte Jr. struggled with the decision.

Perhaps Birotte is the merely the fall guy for all this. Maybe he believed the case was ok to pursue - still interviewing witnesses, extension of GJ etc- yet he got told from on high (Washington DoJ?) to kill it now.

 

[Velodude]

Good. Now you understand why you can't bootstrap "membership" to prove "pattern of racketeering activity."

You can't prove a RICO violation occurred. How can you suggest that the feds could?

The Feds did indicate RICO indictments by including amongst the defendants Weisel, Bruyneel and Armstrong.

We know those three were directors of Tailwind amongst others.

Are you so starry eyed you have not been reading or reading and not absorbing the media since last Friday?

 

[Race Radio]

Give they mentioned the fact that Armstrong was an owner of the team and he has already received a target letter for the Qui Tam case I think it is safe to assume that the Feds believe that Armstrong was an owner.

If there is a Qui Tam trial I would expect it to be messy, very messy. Given that multiple people have been notified that they are targets how would any settlement/judgement be divided? Is a person's liability based on there percentage ownership? If so Wiesel should be very concerned

 

[Polish]

Only requires a breach of a minimum of two specified illegal activities defined within racketeering over a period to form a pattern for RICO.

By using "including" it is not exhaustive but you can add income tax evasion and money laundering as starters.

I would expect all those Federal crimes were consistent from 1999 to at least 2007. Except for witness tampering. We know of Tyler and ex PA Anderson but that could only be the tip of the iceberg given Armstrong's propensity for abusive conduct.

Velodude, there is no RICO, no laundering, no tampering.
Investigation has been dropped. Case is closed. February 3rd.
Insufficient Evidence.

Geez, you are like the Black Knight.
And I mean that as a compliment. Grrrrr.

But please step aside and let us fanboys pass. Please.
If you want to call it a "draw" - fine. Whatever.

BTW, or you typing with your nose or just banging your head against the keyboard?

 

[KingsMountain]

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.

Not surprisingly, I find myself to be nearly free of bias. In any event, words have meaning, especially in contracts. I haven't expressed an opinion excepting issues related to the term of the contract; rather I'm pointing out that the words of the contract mean what they say.

Regarding the bolded section, why do you say "sole genesis"? There are lots of things that either Rock, Tailwind or Armstrong could have done that were illegal and involved the USPS, but weren't directly related to doping, or even to the sponsorship contract. It is relatively common in criminal cases, especially ones with an international component, I believe.

 

[thehog]

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

I foresee Floyd, Tyler, Betsy and SCA forming a class action to release the evidence for their own civil damages case.

 

[KingsMountain]

Give they mentioned the fact that Armstrong was an owner of the team and he has already received a target letter for the Qui Tam case I think it is safe to assume that the Feds believe that Armstrong was an owner.

If a target letter in the Qui Tam case has gone out, that means the decision of whether the feds will join must have been made, and had to have been revealed to the recipients of the target letter. So do your really know that a Qui Tam letter has gone out? If so, who is party to the case?

While I think it is true that Armstrong was a part owner of Tailwind (he has testified to that effect), why do you think ownership is salient to receiving a letter?

 

[joe_papp]

There has been a lot of criticism of Birotte as he ultimately was the one to make the announcement that the case was being pulled.

However - from the NPR piece:


Perhaps Birotte is the merely the fall guy for all this. Maybe he believed the case was ok to pursue - still interviewing witnesses, extension of GJ etc- yet he got told from on high (Washington DoJ?) to kill it now.

My understanding about the viability of the case is that the issue was not any lack of evidence or weakness in the results of the investigation produced over time, but rather was simple politics. That is to say, the case wasn't killed b/c the investigation failed to turn up the evidence that would support the allegations and prove charges. Rather, the perceived cost:benefit from a political perspective of undermining the Larry story - which was identified at the outset as not a concern - then became a concern after an extended and very successful application of pressure by LA's team.

Lacking at this point is the specific details of that pressure that would corroborate it beyond a reasonable doubt (lol).

Who knows, though, right? Who cares? At least this has taken the heat off of Vino, who, BTW, probably isn't so sad to have lost Contador from Astana now.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

My understanding about the viability of the case is that the issue was not any lack of evidence or weakness in the results of the investigation produced over time, but rather was simple politics. That is to say, the case wasn't killed b/c the investigation failed to turn up the evidence that would support the allegations and prove charges. Rather, the perceived cost:benefit from a political perspective of undermining the Larry story - which was identified at the outset as not a concern - then became a concern after an extended and very successful application of pressure by LA's team.

Lacking at this point is the specific details of that pressure that would corroborate it beyond a reasonable doubt (lol).

Who knows, though, right? Who cares? At least this has taken the heat off of Vino, who, BTW, probably isn't so sad to have lost Contador from Astana now.

I would agree with you - there can be little doubt the investigation has produced enough evidence that some could have been indicted (not necessarily Armstrong) -the fact that the whole case got pulled suggests political interference.

I suppose my point was that Birotte is viewed by many as the 'bad guy' when the likelihood is that he was left little choice by others.

 

[joe_papp]

I would agree with you - there can be little doubt the investigation has produced enough evidence that some could have been indicted (not necessarily Armstrong) -the fact that the whole case got pulled suggests political interference.

I suppose my point was that Birotte is viewed by many as the 'bad guy' when the likelihood is that he was left little choice by others.

That sounds reasonable to me. There's so much speculating going on it can't be easy for anyone involved in the investigation to manage the impact on their own profile, to the degree that they're interested in doing so.

 

[Race Radio]

If a target letter in the Qui Tam case has gone out, that means the decision of whether the feds will join must have been made, and had to have been revealed to the recipients of the target letter. So do your really know that a Qui Tam letter has gone out? If so, who is party to the case?

While I think it is true that Armstrong was a part owner of Tailwind (he has testified to that effect), why do you think ownership is salient to receiving a letter?

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=5529667

Defendants including Armstrong, team manager Johan Bruyneel, longtime agent Bill Stapleton, financier Thomas W. Weisel and numerous owner-investors in the various companies that operated the team were notified of their status last week.

 

[BotanyBay]

There has been a lot of criticism of Birotte as he ultimately was the one to make the announcement that the case was being pulled.

However - from the NPR piece:


Perhaps Birotte is the merely the fall guy for all this. Maybe he believed the case was ok to pursue - still interviewing witnesses, extension of GJ etc- yet he got told from on high (Washington DoJ?) to kill it now.

Of course he struggled. He kept the case alive because it had merit. And perhaps he delayed filing it so that the political climate above him might change to more favorabvle conditions. You know, a building intensity of bombshells exploding in the media, etc. But my guess is that the political climate not only remained unchanged, but perhaps intensified.

And we have to be willing to concede here, that at some point, Armstrong deserved his day in court. Every defendant should get theirs in a timely manner. Two years was ridiculous.

Birotte will reap rewards for this decision eventually. Armstrong might not go to jail, but he lost his deity status in the eye of public opinion. No more sitting next to Letterman, etc. Forever an emotional asterisk.

In reality, we still win. We gave him enough rope, and he hung himself.

 

[BotanyBay]

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=5529667

Papp's favorite galpal

 

[MacRoadie]

Just look at the facts. They're obvious.

What is obvious is that the investigation was slammed shut due to politics.

What I was hoping you might be able to comprehend is how the devolution of the dialog on this forum could potentially have a real impact on that.

Try this on for size:

The forum is often quoted either directly or indirectly in major publications, it is also generally believed that Lance, and or his minions, follow the forum on a regular basis.

A casual visitor who finds his way to the forum via some other source, especially one who may not be as nuanced in professional cycling may look in the clinic. This person sees the posts from both sides, reads some of the far-fetched prognotications from both sides and comes to the conclusion that everyone here, hater and fanboy alike, is nuts. Why not? What barometer can he use to differentiate? The value of the good analysis is diluted by the pablum that accompanies it.

Take it a very small step further:

The senator from the great state of Blahblahblah gets a phone call from his old buddy Mark Fabriani. The senator is on an appropriations committe or an oversight committee or some other position to influence the DOJ. Good ol' Mark sends the senator a packet of information on this Lance Armstrong investigation, including some links to a few online news sources, including the Clinic, and asks the senator to take a peek at this witch hunt the Central District is on.

Senator So-and-so doesn't have time to surf the web, he's got some serious legislating to do, so he tells his 20 year old clerk to do what 20 year olds do and check these sources out.

Clerk takes a look at some of the ridiculous comments and comes back to his boss and says "Senator, those bike people are crazy, they are even comparing Lance Armstrong to the mafia and Columbian drug cartels. They say his foundation is all a sham and a tax shell and does absolutely zero good. They love cancer. And guess what, that lady Betsy Andreu that you told me to look in to? She's on there too! She's one of those tin foil hat wearing loonies. That Mike Anderson fellow, the former mechanic who sued Lance? Yep, he's on there. So is that guy Joe Papp. Isn't he a convicted felon, and didn't he sell the dope to Kayle Leogrande and Rock Racing?" (Sorry Joe).

Now all of a sudden the senator is thinking maybe this is how those other riders who (allegedly) testified think too. After all, the forum is quoted as a media source, and the posters hold themselves out to be "insiders" or at least "in the know". Plus, it sure has a lot of people who seem to have a vested interest in the outcome of the case.

Suddenly, it's not just a lying and cheating Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton, and a bunch of disgruntled former riders and employees, it's also those Andreus that everyone swears have nothing to gain from sticking to their story. Never mind that all she ever did was stick by her decade-old story and only come on here to defend herself when spoken ill of or lied about. Hell, she never even said she hates lances, those were Lance's words. All Mike ever did was believe a promise, and open the wrong cabinet door one day in Girona. That doesn't matter though. Drowned out by all the hyperbole.

All speculation and fantasy? Maybe. Probably. But the shenanigans that go on here do reverberate outside the forum and the internet and don't think for one minute that Armstrong's cronies aren't aware of it and wouldn't spin what started out as genuine and measured anger towards Armstrong and an honest desire for the truth, but ended up an almost hysterical shouting match to their own benefit.

Is there still core value to the information, insight and analysis performed here? Absolutely. But at some point, when the dialog dissolves into a shouting match or a series of insults, or simply the desire to beat the other guy then some of that good stuff is drowned out by the white noise.

THAT is what gets to me.

 

[BotanyBay]

-the fact that the whole case got pulled suggests political interference.

I suppose my point was that Birotte is viewed by many as the 'bad guy' when the likelihood is that he was left little choice by others.

You could be very correct. It could also be because there was internal evidence of prosecutorial / investigational misconduct. Who knows?

I wouldn't want to be in Birotte's shoes right now. This reminds me of a great film from the early 80's called "Absence of Malice" with Paul Newman.
It's a story about how an Asst US Atty is having a dry year. Needs to score more RICO case wins, so he opens an investigation, leaning on a mobster's "straight" son (Newman) in hopes of squeezing him for some info on some "guilty" people in exchange for being left alone. Instead, Newman's character skrewz-over the US Atty and the journalist that acted as his puppet. It is a GREAT film. Worth watching on Netflix.

If you happen to need a good feel for just how powerful a US Atty is, then watch this film. In other words, you don't EVER want to be on the wrong side of the feds.

 

[BotanyBay]

What is obvious is that the investigation was slammed shut due to politics.

What I was hoping you might be able to comprehend is how the devolution of the dialog on this forum could potentially have a real impact on that.

Try this on for size:

The forum is often quoted either directly or indirectly in major publications, it is also generally believed that Lance, and or his minions, follow the forum on a regular basis.

Mac,

We need someone to look into what happened. Whatever conclusion the result may be (pro or con, whichever side any of us might be on). I think forums like these act as an inspriation for stories that result. If the rhetoric is more that people feel that political pressure led to this outcome, then they'll take that angle. So let's lat this play-out. And I think it will.

 

[MacRoadie]

You could be very correct. It could also be because there was internal evidence of prosecutorial / investigational misconduct. Who knows?

I wouldn't want to be in Birotte's shoes right now. This reminds me of a great film from the early 80's called "Absence of Malice" with Paul Newman.
It's a story about how an Asst US Atty is having a dry year. Needs to score more RICO case wins, so he opens an investigation, leaning on a mobster's "straight" son (Newman) in hopes of squeezing him for some info on some "guilty" people in exchange for being left alone. Instead, Newman's character skrewz-over the US Atty and the journalist that acted as his puppet. It is a GREAT film. Worth watching on Netflix.

Awesome Wilford Brimley role.

 

[BotanyBay]

Awesome Wilford Brimley role.

His DEFINING role (in my opinion).

 

[KingsMountain]

http://www.justice.gov/usao/pae/Documents/fcaprocess2.pdf describes the process. It has been my (perhaps faulty) understanding that the case is sealed and target letters can't go out until the DOJ decides to join or not. If that is true, and if Bonnie Ford's assertion that those folks received Qui Tam target letters before Sept 2010 is also true, then the feds didn't join (yet).

Either way, if they haven't joined by now, and are declining the opportunity to prosecute the rest of the case, it seems unlikely that they will join. Interesting.

 

[Granville57]

The important thing to note here, as I catch up on the last 25 pages or so, is that we're witnessing BotanyBay 2.0 in all its image-posting glory. My original proposition was that when the indictments came down, BB would rekindle the fire. But if Lance being let off is what it takes, well, it is a very hard bargain to settle for but, under the circumstances, one that I'm willing to accept — for the time being, that is.

 

[BotanyBay]

The important thing to note here, as I catch up on the last 25 pages or so, is that we're witnessing BotanyBay 2.0 in all its image-posting glory. My original proposition was that when the indictments came down, BB would rekindle the fire. But if Lance being let off is what it takes, well, it is a very hard bargain to settle for but, under the circumstances, one that I'm willing to accept — for the time being, that is.

I figure CN.com can't really complain about my posting images anymore, being that they force us to view scantily-clad women as part of THEIR sponsored content now. Susan will first need to slap the publisher on the wrist before she slaps mine.

Fight the Power!