US prosecutors drop case against Armstrong/USPS

[Semper Fidelis]

I was nowhere near....you two having a geek off?

Ok bed calls...and one last post in the 2012 TDF prediction thread as I am being flamed by a guy who admits his only experience of cycling himself is riding on the pavement

p.s Race...is there a Marmotte or Fondo thread still going somewhere?

I was going to say something about being there in Japan 1990 but VeloDude was doing such a "great" job at Epic Google Fail it was more fun to read!

Hey Crawfish is in Durango ....great country ......good BEER!

Tommy D ....just called and had to hang up quick like....HAD TO HIT THE PORTOJON.


Spinn it up Crawfish!

 

[straydog]

I was going to say something about being there in Japan 1990 but VeloDude was doing such a "great" job at Epic Google Fail it was more fun to read!

Hey Crawfish is in Durango ....great country ......good BEER!

Tommy D ....just called and had to hang up quick like....HAD TO HIT THE PORTOJON.


Spinn it up Crawfish!

Ha Ha! I am not going on to twitter to watch or flame...it gets too much like car crash TV for me. I'll end up drunker than he is.

 

[ChrisE]

Hate to wade into this chaos but Junior Worlds were in Moscow in 1989. I remember it pretty clearly. Armstrong stayed off the front most of the race. The Euros were impressed by his better-"responderness", but not his tactical acumen. Chann McRea also rode for the National team that day.

Another strong guy came in third, Steffen Wesemann

Fixed that for you. You're welcome. I've got some other ones I have learned here as well if that doesn't tidy things up.

 

[thehog]

Swinging topic back on track and this maybe one for Velodude;

What recourse do SCA and the Sunday Times now have?

Can they access the evidence if they brought against civil proceedings? or is the evidence sealed for government use only?

Is there any recourse at all for SCA/ST - or the fact the case was dropped with no ruling mean they don't have a point of law to reference?

 

[BotanyBay]

Jessie Grieco, Married to Dylan Casey.

no one takes better "hawt" pictures of herself than mari holden

 

[patricknd]

Fixed that for you. You're welcome. I've got some other ones I have learned here as well if that doesn't tidy things up.

i'm confused, chris. i thought he didn't become a better responder until after he unfairly got cancer. that's why he started winning the tour.

 

[Velodude]

Swinging topic back on track and this maybe one for Velodude;

What recourse do SCA and the Sunday Times now have?

Can they access the evidence if they brought against civil proceedings? or is the evidence sealed for government use only?

Is there any recourse at all for SCA/ST - or the fact the case was dropped with no ruling mean they don't have a point of law to reference?

SCA and Sunday Times could only rely on an outcome in the expected USADA proceedings that Armstrong doped.

They would have no recourse to evidence in the "pulled" investigation.

USADA and WADA do have recourse under the UNESCO international convention against doping as all ratifying countries have undertaken to support the sanctioning of doping violators.

If US government did not support USADA it would be in breach of the convention and run the risk of being excluded from international competition and nominating to hold future Olympic Games.

Statute of Limitations would not be an issue with the Sunday Times as obtaining a judgment by fraud has not time limits.

SCA would have SOL problems as even the decision on the 2004 "bonus" arbitration settlement would be out of time now.

Note: In terms of USADA funding to pursue doping violations I read where WADA provided a $1m grant to USADA for the Floyd Landis prosecution. So US taxpayers can now sleep easy if they are agitated about the potential cost of an LA pursuit by USADA.

 

[straydog]

SCA and Sunday Times could only rely on an outcome in the expected USADA proceedings that Armstrong doped.

They would have no recourse to evidence in the "pulled" investigation.

USADA and WADA do have recourse under the UNESCO international convention against doping as all ratifying countries have undertaken to support the sanctioning of doping violators.

If US government did not support USADA it would be in breach of the convention and run the risk of being excluded from international competition and nominating to hold future Olympic Games.

Statute of Limitations would not be an issue with the Sunday Times as obtaining a judgment by fraud has not time limits.

SCA would have SOL problems as even the decision on the 2004 "bonus" arbitration settlement would be out of time now.

Note: In terms of USADA funding to pursue doping violations I read where WADA provided a $1m grant to USADA for the Floyd Landis prosecution. So US taxpayers can now sleep easy if they are agitated about the potential cost of an LA pursuit by USADA.

Also part of the SCA ruling, of which there was one by the way, intimated that whether Armstrong doped or not wasn't actually relevant to clauses of the contracts he had with SCA....if you don't believe me...ask Velodude to google it for you...he's good at that!

As for the Sunday Times....the suit was in particular regard to allegations Walsh had made in LA Confidential....and it was settled, not a judgement so the point is moot anyway. They would have to find something to sue him for, and unfortunately they can't sue him for the fact that they didn't have the balls to go to court with him and instead decided to settle Something also tells me Murdoch has slightly more pressing matters on his hands at present!

As for any supposed WADA/USADA investigation...well GJ testimony won't be shared....and unless someone has unearthed something amongst the information that has already been at WADA's disposal for the last 10 years....well, I think some of you may be relieving yourselves into the wind as they say

But if your interested I have a whole box full of second hand, slightly tarnished, liquid to mouth transportation devices if anyone is desperate for anything else to grasp onto

Peace

 

[Race Radio]

As for any supposed WADA/USADA investigation...well GJ testimony won't be shared....and unless someone has unearthed something amongst the information that has already been at WADA's disposal for the last 10 years....well, I think some of you may be relieving yourselves into the wind as they say

Won't matter much. Most witness spoke gave evidence outside of the Grand Jury

 

[straydog]

Won't matter much. Most witness spoke gave evidence outside of the Grand Jury

you have a point Race, there were people who weren't supoenaed....but I genuinely don't think there is anyone saying anything that hasn't already been said, who would testify to WADA.

 

[Velodude]

Also part of the SCA ruling, of which there was one by the way, intimated that whether Armstrong doped or not wasn't actually relevant to clauses of the contracts he had with SCA....if you don't believe me...ask Velodude to google it for you...he's good at that!

As for the Sunday Times....the suit was in particular regard to allegations Walsh had made in LA Confidential....and it was settled, not a judgement so the point is moot anyway. They would have to find something to sue him for, and unfortunately they can't sue him for the fact that they didn't have the balls to go to court with him and instead decided to settle Something also tells me Murdoch has slightly more pressing matters on his hands at present!

As for any supposed WADA/USADA investigation...well GJ testimony won't be shared....and unless someone has unearthed something amongst the information that has already been at WADA's disposal for the last 10 years....well, I think some of you may be relieving yourselves into the wind as they say

But if your interested I have a whole box full of second hand, slightly tarnished, liquid to mouth transportation devices if anyone is desperate for anything else to grasp onto
Peace

Note: I disturbed your post by removing some emoticons as my post would be over the maximum with their inclusion.

Everyone became aware that Armstrong was not in breach of the SCA bonus agreement if he had doped as it was not imposed as a condition of contract.

However, the bonus was to be paid if he won the TdF. If USADA/CAS found that Armstrong doped those TdF titles would be stripped from him and Armstrong would not have claims under the SCA bonus agreements as he no longer won to claim the bonus from Tailwind for Tailwind to claim the bonus from SCA.

It all will come down to interpretation of the SOL concerning when the SOL commences. We need the ex resident forum legal expert MarkvW to infuse on this issue.

Under UK law, the jurisdiction of the Sunday Times case, the Court deems that a settlement is a judgment for Court rules. So if a settlement is obtained through fraud .......

This point has been discussed. I dare not put up a link even though I know So_Cal is anal retentive on the lack of linked references. You can find your own sources If you have a problem, PM me.

Who needs GJ testimony when the Feds only put up a fraction of the witnesses being mainly those of some reluctance (McIlvain, Popovich, etc) and sufficient other witnesses to prove the indictment counts?

USADA has the powers through arbitration to issue subpoenas for documents and witnesses. I am certain they would know who the Feds have interviewed that would be of interest to prove a non quantitative analysis for an LA doping positive.

 

[thehog]

http://www.sports-central.org/sports/2012/02/19/looks_like_lance_inc_too_big_to_fail.php

Nothing new but a nice summary of events.

 

[ChrisE]

i'm confused, chris. i thought he didn't become a better responder until after he unfairly got cancer. that's why he started winning the tour.

That may be true, my southern country bumpkin friend type person. We should wait for one of the clinic smart guys to weigh in on this tricky subject.

The dilemma here is how would somebody know if one was a better responder prior to EPO? It was established in the clinic that PEDs pre EPO were ineffective. This was concluded when I questioned GL beating roided up Delgados and Fignons in the 80's. Since LA was mean to GL then that means those PEDs were useless so GL could beat those riders. I was set straight on that pronto. What stupid riders like Delgado were for taking roids and getting busted for masking agents since they were ineffective! What rubes!

So, maybe they didn't say in the junior worlds in 1989 that he was a better responder. If they did say it then it may be possible that he is the only rider on the face of the earth that responded to pre-EPO PEDs. Now that would be something, though we shouldn't be surprised. It would just be something else that tilted the playing field that much more....it is nearly perpendicular to the ground at the moment and that would make the playing field a complete 90 degrees off plane, or perhaps flip it upside down.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Also part of the SCA ruling, of which there was one by the way, intimated that whether Armstrong doped or not wasn't actually relevant to clauses of the contracts he had with SCA....if you don't believe me...ask Velodude to google it for you...he's good at that!

Well, ask yourself what was relevant to the clauses?

Winning the Tour of course - and as long as his name was recognized in the results they had to pay - so what would happen if any of those results are taken away?

As for the Sunday Times....the suit was in particular regard to allegations Walsh had made in LA Confidential....and it was settled, not a judgement so the point is moot anyway. They would have to find something to sue him for, and unfortunately they can't sue him for the fact that they didn't have the balls to go to court with him and instead decided to settle Something also tells me Murdoch has slightly more pressing matters on his hands at present!

As for any supposed WADA/USADA investigation...well GJ testimony won't be shared....and unless someone has unearthed something amongst the information that has already been at WADA's disposal for the last 10 years....well, I think some of you may be relieving yourselves into the wind as they say

But if your interested I have a whole box full of second hand, slightly tarnished, liquid to mouth transportation devices if anyone is desperate for anything else to grasp onto

Peace

Wasn't some of the BALCO GJ testimony shared?

But even if it is not - we know that USADA have been gathering their own information as Tygart was in Europe with the Feds.

 

[straydog]

Note: I disturbed your post by removing some emoticons as my post would be over the maximum with their inclusion.

Everyone became aware that Armstrong was not in breach of the SCA bonus agreement if he had doped as it was not imposed as a condition of contract.

However, the bonus was to be paid if he won the TdF. If USADA/CAS found that Armstrong doped those TdF titles would be stripped from him and Armstrong would not have claims under the SCA bonus agreements as he no longer won to claim the bonus from Tailwind for Tailwind to claim the bonus from SCA.

It all will come down to interpretation of the SOL concerning when the SOL commences. We need the ex resident forum legal expert MarkvW to infuse on this issue.

Under UK law, the jurisdiction of the Sunday Times case, the Court deems that a settlement is a judgment for Court rules. So if a settlement is obtained through fraud .......

This point has been discussed. I dare not put up a link even though I know So_Cal is anal retentive on the lack of linked references. You can find your own sources If you have a problem, PM me.

Who needs GJ testimony when the Feds only put up a fraction of the witnesses being mainly those of some reluctance (McIlvain, Popovich, etc) and sufficient other witnesses to prove the indictment counts?

USADA has the powers through arbitration to issue subpoenas for documents and witnesses. I am certain they would know who the Feds have interviewed that would be of interest to prove a non quantitative analysis for an LA doping positive.

To the bolded...it is considered "judgement" as it is binding...however it is not considered a judgement for the purposes of appeal, as there is no judgement per se and therefore no gounds on which to appeal, or, for that matter, for the puposes of pursuing any associated criminal offences i.e perjury etc....you're right...you do need a legal expert

If you think McIlvain or Popo are gonna say pip, then please pm me and cos I've got this bridge I'm selling

As for the last part...the FEDs followed the leads given to them by the WADA...this non quantitative analysis you are so desperate to see come to fruition is going to be mighty easy to overturn in front of CAS, when your star witnesses are two ex dopers, and a couple of fired employees...

Ok...all this, in essence, is pointless....you are going to hope and pray for what you hope and pray for...no matter what anyone says...and honestly...I don't want to take away your dreams....but if you are expecting a hug when it all goes south like last time....you might be better looking at someone other than me

 

[straydog]

Well, ask yourself what was relevant to the clauses?

Winning the Tour of course - and as long as his name was recognized in the results they had to pay - so what would happen if any of those results are taken away?


Wasn't some of the BALCO GJ testimony shared?

But even if it is not - we know that USADA have been gathering their own information as Tygart was in Europe with the Feds.

No it wasn't...

And Mas you certainly won't be getting a hug either...cos you have always been very very naughty

See my above post...I'll politely absent myself from this thread until it's time for me to dish up the humble pie...or someone posts something so desperate I can't help myself....Have fun...see you all in another 6 months or so

Peace

 

[Velodude]

To the bolded...it is considered "judgement" as it is binding...however it is not considered a judgement for the purposes of appeal, as there is no judgement per se and therefore no gounds on which to appeal, or, for that matter, for the puposes of pursuing any associated criminal offences i.e perjury etc....you're right...you do need a legal expert

If you think McIlvain or Popo are gonna say pip, then please pm me and cos I've got this bridge I'm selling:

As for the last part...the FEDs followed the leads given to them by the WADA...this non quantitative analysis you are so desperate to see come to fruition is going to be mighty easy to overturn in front of CAS, when your star witnesses are two ex dopers, and a couple of fired employees...

Ok...all this, in essence, is pointless....you are going to hope and pray for what you hope and pray for...no matter what anyone says...and honestly...I don't want to take away your dreams....but if you are expecting a hug when it all goes south like last time....you might be better looking at someone other than me

Straydog, you are mentally straying

If parties settle the proceedings then the dispute relating to the litigation is over, forever. Cannot be revived except under the existence of fraud circumstances.

If one party wants to box on later the other party only has to produce the Deed of Settlement signed by all parties and stamped by the Court.

Court would be enquiring whether that appealing party's lawyer has a law degree!

Only exception is the settlement/judgment can be set aside without time limitation if fraud is proven in obtaining that settlement/judgment.

That would be by a motion to the court not an appeal.

Now I would suspect that Mr Armstrong in litigating this matter would have sworn under oath that he had never doped to refute the book extracts in the Sunday Times. All trolls in a global conspiracy against him.

 

[straydog]

Straydog, you are mentally straying

If parties settle the proceedings then the dispute relating to the litigation is over, forever. Cannot be revived except under the existence of fraud circumstances.

If one party wants to box on later the other party only has to produce the Deed of Settlement signed by all parties and stamped by the Court.

Court would be enquiring whether that appealing party's lawyer has a law degree!

Only exception is the settlement/judgment can be set aside without time limitation if fraud is proven in obtaining that settlement/judgment.

That would be by a motion to the court not an appeal.

Now I would suspect that Mr Armstrong in litigating this matter would have sworn under oath that he had never doped to refute the book extracts in the Sunday Times. All trolls in a global conspiracy against him.

ok...last bite before bed...I am on a promise

If you have a quick look see over at the reasons for settlement...i.e...the judge having made a statement to the effect that he agreed with Armstrong's definition of what the Times' articles had intended to insinuate about him...I think you'll find that "fraud" definitely won't be grounds for a motion....appeal...whatever you want to call it....and incidentally I certainly aint a lawyer....I have too many morals

And now honestly Velo....if you aren't being deafened by the sound of that barrel being scraped...I am...so I wish you good night...sweet sweet dreams (even if they include Lance in the bottom bunk) and I take my leave....I am sure we will have the pleasure elsewhere...but this one is done.

Peace

 

[mewmewmew13]

The 'hit-and-run' style of posting that some have on here reminds me of a small child that sticks his tongue out and then quickly slams the door.

Also, there is a lot of phony knowledge and 'expert' opinions and most here have learned who backs it up and who is just enjoying the 'game'.

No matter what he may say Lance is not having a peaceful phase of his life right now. I see that George indicated that when things get tense so does Mr Armstrong...no time to relax. ...need to control.

 

[Velodude]

ok...last bite before bed...I am on a promise

If you have a quick look see over at the reasons for settlement...i.e...the judge having made a statement to the effect that he agreed with Armstrong's definition of what the Times' articles had intended to insinuate about him...I think you'll find that "fraud" definitely won't be grounds for a motion....appeal...whatever you want to call it....and incidentally I certainly aint a lawyer....I have too many morals

And now honestly Velo....if you aren't being deafened by the sound of that barrel being scraped...I am...so I wish you good night...sweet sweet dreams (even if they include Lance in bottom bunk) and I take my leave....I am sure we will have the pleasure elsewhere...but this one is done.

Peace

Give me a link to the settlement. I believe, like most settlements, it was confidential between the parties so that link would be like finding the ghost-who-walks. No statements by the judge either.

There was a reported judgment or ruling relating only to meaning of words before the parties called a truce

 

[Race Radio]

If you think McIlvain or Popo are gonna say pip, then please pm me and cos I've got this bridge I'm selling

Sure....Stephanie spent 7 hours with the Grand Jury discussing recipes.

 

[thehog]

The 'hit-and-run' style of posting that some have on here reminds me of a small child that sticks his tongue out and then quickly slams the door.

Also, there is a lot of phony knowledge and 'expert' opinions and most here have learned who backs it up and who is just enjoying the 'game'.

No matter what he may say Lance is not having a peaceful phase of his life right now. I see that George indicated that when things get tense so does Mr Armstrong...no time to relax. ...need to control.

I would agree. The way the case was dropped was so "un-Armstrong". Hardly the inspiring vindication that he wanted to show his fans. He's also behaved in such a weak fashion throughout the case. He's also become somewhat meek.

The entire 2-year show has become murky, dirty and very confusing.

I don't think anyone knows where they stand.

To those like SCA, Sunday Times not to mention Floyd and Tyler who wanted for the case conclude have been left hanging and wasted 2 years waiting.

For the rest of cycling no one dare mention the man again. Outside of Liggart he can't be spoken. You have to pretend he never happened.

For those involved with Armstrong just want to forget him. He dragged so many people into his crimes they all want to run.

Sad ending really.

One thing I'd like to know is where Pat and Hein stand in relation to Lance. Do they want to drop him? He is a dead weight for cycling now.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

SCA and Sunday Times could only rely on an outcome in the expected USADA proceedings that Armstrong doped.

They would have no recourse to evidence in the "pulled" investigation.

USADA and WADA do have recourse under the UNESCO international convention against doping as all ratifying countries have undertaken to support the sanctioning of doping violators.

If US government did not support USADA it would be in breach of the convention and run the risk of being excluded from international competition and nominating to hold future Olympic Games.

Statute of Limitations would not be an issue with the Sunday Times as obtaining a judgment by fraud has not time limits.

SCA would have SOL problems as even the decision on the 2004 "bonus" arbitration settlement would be out of time now.

Note: In terms of USADA funding to pursue doping violations I read where WADA provided a $1m grant to USADA for the Floyd Landis prosecution. So US taxpayers can now sleep easy if they are agitated about the potential cost of an LA pursuit by USADA.

In my opinion the Fed's do not give a rats *** if the USA gets future Olympic Games. They will do what they want ........"they" have already proved that with their "Friday" come lately anouncement of dropping the case.
Sure hope no one is hanging a hat on that treaty to make the Fed's hand over evidence to USADA. IF the Fed's turn over evidence then it will be cause the Fed's want to do it. In my opinion no doubt but please feel free to google away.

 

[thehog]

In my opinion the Fed's do not give a rats *** if the USA gets future Olympic Games. They will do what they want ........"they" have already proved that with their "Friday" come lately anouncement of dropping the case.
Sure hope no one is hanging a hat on that treaty to make the Fed's hand over evidence to USADA. IF the Fed's turn over evidence then it will be cause the Fed's want to do it. In my opinion no doubt but please feel free to google away.

I'm with you. They've all moved on and the evidence has been sealed and stuck in a box labelled "do not open". That box is sitting in a warehouse in Delaware never to be found.

The U turn to drop the case means they don't want any of it seeing the light of day. If there's some juicy stuff in there then they're not going to pass it off to USADA for the press to later ridicule them for dropping the investigation.

 

[BillytheKid]

Things are getting spooky around here.