US prosecutors drop case against Armstrong/USPS

[MarkvW]

Complete load of nonsense. Most people who engage in racketeering don't make a breach of contract obvious. As a matter of fact it's their behavior that conceals the breach. In your world maybe it's ok for criminal conspiracies to use fraud to accrue to their benefit.

As to the second paragraph, Velodude sunk that silliness a few pages back.

If a breach of contract isn't obvious, it's not much of a breach then, is it? If the breach isn't obvious to the other party to the contract, why should they care?

You better take some more classes at the Velodude School of Law!

 

[Polish]

Let me quote Travis Tygart of USADA:

“Our sports are the fabric of our American way of life. They teach us all that dedication, character, hard work, playing fair can lead to fulfillment and accomplishment. … We do not tolerate this type of corruption and fraud in business, academia or other important institutions. Why should we accept it in sports?

What a load of self-serving BS.

Sports are NOT the fabric of the American way of life.
Maybe the jockstrap of the American way of life, but certainly not the fabric. Not even close. What a load of BS lol.

And most Americans do not consider Cycling a sport anyway.

 

[Pazuzu]

I've read nothing in these last 115 pages that has given me any hope that Armstrong will be held to account for 1999 - 2009. I just can't see it happening, and that saddens me.

Every article you read regarding this issue has comments below, and the vast majority of the comments echo the same arguments of 'never tested positive', 'good works', 'French', 'Haters' etc.

For those of us who've actually taken the time to delve a little deeper into the history of the period it is an immense frustration. We know he doped, and not just doped, but doped on a truly epic scale. We know he hides behind 'cancer', but not just hides behind it, he profits handsomely from it. We know he's fought people, but not just fought them, but actively tried to tarnish their names, their business and their credibility.

And he does all this knowing that these people are, in the end, if we take away all the lawyers, sponsors, authorities, strip away all these things - correct. They are right. Tyler is right. Floyd is right. Kimmage, Walsh, Betsy, RaceRadio - they are all right. They say he doped because he DID dope. They know what he knows and he knows what they know.

I find all of this utterly deflating. I don't like to see wrongdoing go unpunished. But that's what all of this boils down to. He's not going face sanction and that's wrong because he did those things. He has permanently tarnished cycling as a professional sport for me.

It's interesting that we have another Olympics in my home city this year. Sport would do well to look to the last Games held in London, because if pro cycling is sport, I'd rather my son goes on to learn the violin.

Watching this spectacle and Bjarn Riis tonight - frankly pro cycling is not exactly living up to the higher ideals sport is supposed to aspire to. I will wonder why I keep watching cycling for a while then one day realise I haven't watched cycling in years.

Spot on. Professional bicycling over the past 15 years (and probably longer) can barely be considered a sport thanks to Armstrong and all the other cheats.

 

[MarkvW]

What a load of self-serving BS.

Sports are NOT the fabric of the American way of life.
Maybe the jockstrap of the American way of life, but certainly not the fabric. Not even close. What a load of BS lol.

And most Americans do not consider Cycling a sport anyway.

Cotton is the fabric of our life. I'm not kidding. I saw it on TV.

 

[MarkvW]

Spot on. Professional bicycling over the past 15 years (and probably longer) can barely be considered a sport thanks to Armstrong and all the other cheats.

. . . and thanks to those who tolerate the cheats.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

If a breach of contract isn't obvious, it's not much of a breach then, is it? If the breach isn't obvious to the other party to the contract, why should they care?

You better take some more classes at the Velodude School of Law!

So Armstrong's company, tailwind, upheld their part of the bargain by directing a criminal enterprise? I'm sure USPS is happy they were sponsoring a criminal organization...

Got it..

 

[MarkvW]

So Armstrong's company, tailwind, upheld their part of the bargain by directing a criminal enterprise? I'm sure USPS is happy they were sponsoring a criminal organization...

Got it..

You really should read KingsMountain's posts. They really make sense.

 

[Race Radio]

If a breach of contract isn't obvious, it's not much of a breach then, is it? If the breach isn't obvious to the other party to the contract, why should they care?

You better take some more classes at the Velodude School of Law!

The breach is obvious now..... Isn't that what it would be about? Not just the breach but the attempt to hide the breach, thus the fraud?

 

[Race Radio]

So do I have this correct?

*USPS is concerned about the doping stories

*They receive assurances from multiple team executives that there is no doping on the team

*They formalize these assurances in the next version of the agreement with allows for default for multiple things, including "Material Miss-representation", the fairly broad topic of doping, and negative publicity.

*Despite this it appears some members of the team and management ran a well funded, organized, doping program.

It certainly does not look good, but I suppose they could try the tactic of pretending the riders were doing it all on their own......but I am not sure the "Any publicity is good publicity" line will work.

I can understand why lance is trying to paint himself as "Just an employee". Judging by the Fed's press release they appear not to agree with that assertion

 

[Cal_Joe]

So Armstrong's company, tailwind, upheld their part of the bargain by directing a criminal enterprise? I'm sure USPS is happy they were sponsoring a criminal organization...

Got it..

By any chance is there a version 2.0 of LarryBudMelman that includes a volume control?

 

[Velodude]

Sure, beach of contract is actionable if discovered after the term of the contract. But the action or event that causes the breach has to occur during the term. Furthermore, if the action or event that causes the potential breach is obvious during the term of the contract, the offended party must claim during the term of the contract (or at least close to it).

Let me clarify what you legally mean by "at least close to it".

"Limitations periods begin when a cause of action is deemed to have arisen or when a plaintiff had reason to know of the harm, rather than at the time of the original event."

Doping within the US Postal team was covert and protected by the code of omerta. Knowledge of doping within the contract period that would satisfy the rules of evidence only arose through Floyd's emails in 2010.

Originally Posted by KingsMountain
An act of doping is not cause for breach of the Tailwind-USPS contract. Instead, an event or situation that is prejudicial or causes negative publicity would or could be. That's not an opinion--it's what the contract says. Nothing prejudicial nor negative publicity occurred during the term or close to the term of the contract. The event/situation (negative publicity) that could have caused a breach didn't occur until 5 years later. (Unless we consider the disgrace of former USPS rider Landis, and how that affects the public perception of the USPS....)

Tailwind ran a doping program within the team during the years 2001-2004 as admitted by Landis & Hamilton. The financing of that doping program was kept outside of the books of Tailwind which, no doubt, USPS had an entitlement to receive financial statements demonstrating the application of its $30m + sponsorship funds 2002-2004.

In operating that program the Directors, particularly Bruyneel & Armstrong, were aware or legally should have made themselves aware that Tailwind was breaching sub-clause 4 of the morals turpitude and drug clause. Being:

"Inappropriate drug conduct prejudicial to the Team. or the Postal Service, which is in violation of Team Rules or commonly accepted standards of morality"

By not taking any action Tailwind is in default of Clause 8(a)(iv) of the contract.

Contractually committing Tailwind to police its own anti doping obligations is akin to putting Dracula in charge of the blood bank.

 

[eleven]

They voiced their concerns - they were lied to.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704457604576011490820993006.html

So they chose to maintain the investment? OK then. Thanks.

 

[Hugh Januss]

You really should read KingsMountain's posts. They really make sense.

Bla bla bla

 

[Pazuzu]

. . . and thanks to those who tolerate the cheats.

Oh absolutely. The biggest shock for me has been not that some atheletes are willing to cheat, but that professional cycling's governing bodies seemed not to take doping seriously (if the variously leaked allegations from the Armstrong investigation are to be believed). We saw the same scenario play out in Major League Baseball, which has only just begun to clean up its act after prodding from Congress.

 

[MarkvW]

The breach is obvious now..... Isn't that what it would be about? Not just the breach but the attempt to hide the breach, thus the fraud?

Read post 1234. Negative publicity? Five years?

 

[Kretch]

So they chose to maintain the investment? OK then. Thanks.

Yes they did after being wilfully lied to.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

So they chose to maintain the investment? OK then. Thanks.

They did because they believed the lies.

Its amusing that you wrote 'they chose' - because Bruyneel/LA etc 'chose' to continue doping and put USPS at risk instead of complying with their sponsors wish.

 

[Velodude]

Read post 1234. Negative publicity? Five years?

You should not rely on some other poster who has just blown in as a superior reference to avoid the application of your own expertise.

There are five events defined that give rise to a default in the Tailwind/USPS contract for 2001-2004.

The negative publicity clause (sub-clause (v)) relating to misconduct, criminal behavior and listed drug related offenses is but one of those five events.

On two of the other events Tailwind was in default on one event and allegedly in default on the other on the contract.

Negative publicity was not the only qualifying event. 5 years is just a figure thrown in and has no statute support. SOL runs from time event is made known to USPS.

Edit Clarification

IMO Tailwind did not breach the negative publicity sub-clause during the period of the contract. But the team, in hindsight, allegedly breached the misrepresentation sub-clause (i) in claiming to be clean before and throughout the contract period and inducing USPS into new no doping contract. And sub-clause (iv) was breached, in hindsight, when the team entered into a doping program and Tailwind, in paradox, failed to take preventative action as required by the contract.

 

[Race Radio]

Read post 1234. Negative publicity? Five years?

Yes. Negative publicity. The reason the USPS added the wording to the new contract is because they wanted to avoid negative publicity

Lance Armstrong 'led systematic doping' of US Postal team

There have been hundreds of articles linking the USPS brand with systematic doping and there will be hundreds more. Exactly what USPS was looking to insulate their brand from.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

You're a lawyer?

If a breach of contract isn't obvious, it's not much of a breach then, is it? If the breach isn't obvious to the other party to the contract, why should they care?

You better take some more classes at the Velodude School of Law!

Then you have no shame whatsoever.

BTW, are any kind of legal ethics taught in law school?

 

[Hmmmmm]

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.

I think it is a good piece. Many times I found myself thinking LA was guilty through my own thoughts of reaching my own conclusions, but also being influenced by public opinion on this forum. But in quiet times I would ponder and wonder, and DOUBT. The op/ed piece is someone's opinion, but in this case I think he is expressing a very valid opinion. Laws are in place to prosecute those who are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but to also protect the innocent. While I have my opinions and suspicions, I must also be honest and admit I do have my doubts.

Law should not be a case of win or lose, but in our ridiculous society it has become that at times.

 

[Hmmmmm]

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

This was the op/ed piece I was referring to in my previous post.

On further reflection I must admit I was and still am aghast at the news of the investigation coming to a halt, but it has also caused me to turn inwards and reflect on how I have come to my opinions and judgements.

 

[mewmewmew13]

I think it is a good piece. Many times I found myself thinking LA was guilty through my own thoughts of reaching my own conclusions, but also being influenced by public opinion on this forum. But in quiet times I would ponder and wonder, and DOUBT. The op/ed piece is someone's opinion, but in this case I think he is expressing a very valid opinion. Laws are in place to prosecute those who are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but to also protect the innocent. While I have my opinions and suspicions, I must also be honest and admit I do have my doubts.

Law should not be a case of win or lose, but in our ridiculous society it has become that at times.

hmmmmm you write very intelligent posts.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

but also being influenced by public opinion on this forum. But in quiet times I would ponder and wonder, and DOUBT.

Well i have NO DOUBT, since 7 positives plus hemassist plus affidavits plus dubious blood readings plus Ferrari plus the donations (speak bribes) plus a rider who finished in mountain stages 28 mins down with the likes of Zabel and then "wins" 7 tours in a row? Well, i think the evidence is overhelming that Armstrong is covered up and a über doper. In the end the truth will come out, even if it takes 50 years like the injections for the german soccer team in 1954.

And all those things didn´t came from the forum, but indepentend investigators. Thanks to Damien Rossiot, Walsh etc.

 

[mewmewmew13]

There is also NO doubt in my mind that lance is a thug but sometimes in this clinic it is refreshing to see people thinking before they speak.
I just appreciate thoughtfulness....many of the posts here are so angry or attacking.