US prosecutors drop case against Armstrong/USPS

[thehog]

For all those people moaning about how nobody cares and its in the past so leave it there.

We now have Jan Ullrich coming up for sanctioning this week, almost 6 years after he left the sport never to return, well he was basically blacklisted.

If its good for the goose etc.

It terms of lookijng towards the "future" it was the UCI who thought best to appeal Ullrich's Swiss verdict. He was gone. Retired on to his own life and the UCI thought best to drag up the past. Not sure they apply the same to Armstrong.

 

[Velodude]

It's not that simple, BB. An alternate theory may be that the investigators did their jobs properly and uncovered sufficient evidence to file an indictment, but the AG didn't like his chances of securing convictions. And that, unfortunately, depends on far more than just evidence. There is also the potential of political interference. I'm not saying this happened, but it's equally, or more, likely than innocence.

The case and draft indictments are prepared before empaneling a Grand Jury. The draft indictments serve as a working paper for the jurors.

According to the US Attorneys' Manual the decision to abort should be made before proceeding to a Grand Jury.

The fact it was made after nearly two years of parading witnesses before the GJ supports the leaks that this was not a consensus supported decision but the decision of one man going against the flow rather than case weaknesses to secure a conviction.

 

[Markyboyzx6r]

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.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

I agree with you, but what I mean is that there will be no smoking gun.

There was a great 60 Minutes segment on Abramoff a few months ago. He spoke about how easy it was to "buy" a Senate staff member (the people who actually frame the policy for the Senator)... And they never knew they were being bought. Because they weren't, really.

He'd call up a staffer for a certain senator. Tell them that if they ever got tired of working for so-and-so, that they should ring him up and triple their salary by coming and working for him. Then he'd just sit and wait. They'd come to HIM. They offered the deals for clients of his, offering him more and more freebies for his friends and clients. And every so often, one of these staffers would take him up on the offer to come work for him. Just a cost of doing biz. They usually generated far more value in favors to Abramoff's clients than they ever got back in return through a tripled salary.

The influence is never bought directly. Fabiani now owes a few favors in Washington (which he'll gladly provide when the time comes). If any of you think that guys like this walk around with suitcases full of cash, then you don't understand the subtleties of the game. And they are oh-so-subtle. Remember the concept of scale. These people are in a class way above those of the rest of us. They deal with 90,000 foot views, not 30,000 foot. A phone call or lunch with people at this level results in them going back to the office, making a simple call and mountains get moved. Hints are dropped in subtle ways with certain underlings and desired results are accomplished (quickly).

Look at the former US Atty for Arizona. He lost his job during the Bush administration. He didn't take a subtle hint. It cost him his job.

Tough position for Birrote. I'm thinking "these people" overreached on this one and that Birrote will now be sacrificed. It will be interesting to see where he winds up. "They'll" chop it off at the roots to protect Breuer, Holder, and Boxer.


This article came out 35 minutes ago.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203315804577209511653273618.html

 

[MarkvW]

You don't wait 2 years for the quality evidence. You get your evidence and then plan your next steps. If you get 2 years in, and you don;t know if your evidence is high-qual yet, then you're inept.

You get the best evidence you can, then you make the charging decision. The charging decision is the ultimate judgment call, and it is an ice cold decision best made by the person who will be responsibile for presenting that evidence to the jury. Only that person can imagine the show that the jury will see and will have the judgment and experience to evaluate the impact--guilty or not guilty--that the show will make.

Federal prosecutors are extremely selective. They get heat from federal judges if they 'waste' the judge's time by taking losers to trial (this info sourced from a federal prosecutor). Now you see the flipside--you see how very selective the feds are.

Think about it. No fed prosecutor is going to take Armstrong to trial and lose. No way was the prosecutor operating on a probable cause (grand jury ham sandwich) standard. Nor was the prosecutor likely operating on a beyond a reasonable doubt standard. My suggestion is that the prosecutor wanted overkill sufficient to convince the most moronic juror possible that the evidence demanded a guilty verdict.

So go ahead and argue ineptness, corruption, or influence peddling. There is no evidence of it, but what the heck! I can see only two possibilities: Either the evidence wasn't there or the Attorney General of the United States of America was overcautious. And we don't know what the evidence was.

 

[Race Radio]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203315804577209511653273618.html

The U.S. attorney who closed a nearly two-year investigation into the racing team of seven-time Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong rejected a recommendation from his assistants that he pursue criminal charges in the case.

Interesting. I wonder who he did listen to?

 

[Polish]

I would still laugh at them. Andy wins the 2010 Tour, not 2011. Bert will appear later this year, his suspension ends before the Vuelta.

Good ‘ol hog, still batting .500 on his better days.

Stephens, I respect your posts, and agree with some of the points you make, but I’m just curious. Are you content with the way things have worked out? That Tyler, Floyd and now Contador have had their careers destroyed or severely damaged for doing nothing more than LA did? Does the arbitrary nature (to give LA the benefit of doubt) of who gets caught and who doesn’t not bother you in the slightest?

I ask the same question of JRTinMA and other LA defenders here. Polish, I know, is very good with inequality before the law. It doesn’t bother him in the slightest that LA got away the same stuff that is destroying not only careers but in some cases even lives.

How do you know it does not bother me in the slightest?
I mean you're right, but how did you know.

The Floyd case DID bother me. I STILL consider him the true winner in 2006. He is one of my favorite riders.

And Tyler has been bothering me for a while. I was calling him a Drama Queen long before Puerto. Back then it was very uncool to not be a Tyler fanboy.

And yes, Alberto bothers me. Its that whole Bang Bang thing FCOL.

But those are 4 very different riders and situations.
Apples and Oranges and Strawberries and Waffles.

 

[goober]

Interesting. I wonder who he did listen to?

Actually this is so far from the truth of what happened. This decision to close the investigation is almost 9 months old. Back then a few fought and actually got their way to continue. The media continues to skew the truth or at least timing...

 

[MarkvW]

Tough position for Birrote. I'm thinking "these people" overreached on this one and that Birrote will now be sacrificed. It will be interesting to see where he winds up. "They'll" chop it off at the roots to protect Breuer, Holder, and Boxer.


This article came out 35 minutes ago.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203315804577209511653273618.html

So NOT charging Lance Armstrong (a decision almost surely reviewed by higher ups) is going to get a US Attorney fired? And Barbara Boxer is in on the fix too? All because of actions taken by "these people . . . . . ." Cool.

Would you please write Cameron Diaz into the conspiracy? And Eddy Merckx!

 

[scribe]

Interesting. I wonder who he did listen to?

um. like.... not his assistants?

Maybe his brain told him it was going to be messy, expensive, and not very fruitful.

 

[BotanyBay]

You get the best evidence you can, then you make the charging decision.

Wrong. You get information that says you need to investigate something. Then you investigate. You subpoena evidence. You interview potential witnesses. Then you evaluate. If you think you've actually got something, you walk down to the courthouse and empanel a grand jury. And before you get there, you darn well better have a good idea if you've actually got something.

So, they did a lot of investigating. Looked at lots of evidence. Interviewed lots of witnesses. Then they drafted their charges. Then they went to the GJ. And they spent another 2 YEARS as witness testimony led to more and more testimony. In other words, the more they dug, the more they found. You don't use the grand jury AS your investigative tool. You use them as your tool of indictment. And it is that simple.

So, after all that, someone is owed an explanation. Probably an apology. Either Lance is owed it, or we're owed it.

Why are you so afraid of vindication? Why are you so quick to say "no, we're good"? If I were a wrongly accused man, I'd want the US Atty's head on a spit.

 

[BotanyBay]

Actually this is so far from the truth of what happened. This decision to close the investigation is almost 9 months old. Back then a few fought and actually got their way to continue. The media continues to skew the truth or at least timing...

These aren't the droids we're looking for? Is that your point?

 

[LarryBudMelman]

So NOT charging Lance Armstrong (a decision almost surely reviewed by higher ups) is going to get a US Attorney fired? And Barbara Boxer is in on the fix too? All because of actions taken by "these people . . . . . ." Cool.

Would you please write Cameron Diaz into the conspiracy? And Eddy Merckx!

Yeah dude, it was reviewed by Asst. Attorney General Lanny Breuer, Mark Fabiani's buddy!

Actually it was "reviewed" by Breuer before Birrote ever saw it...

GTFOH!

 

[MarkvW]

Wrong. You get information that says you need to investigate something. Then you investigate. You subpoena evidence. You interview potential witnesses. Then you evaluate. If you think you've actually got something, you walk down to the courthouse and empanel a grand jury. And before you get there, you darn well better have a good idea if you've actually got something.

So, they did a lot of investigating. Looked at lots of evidence. Interviewed lots of witnesses. Then they drafted their charges. Then they went to the GJ. And they spent another 2 YEARS as witness testimony led to more and more testimony. In other words, the more they dug, the more they found. You don't use the grand jury AS your investigative tool. You use them as your tool of indictment. And it is that simple.

So, after all that, someone is owed an explanation. Probably an apology. Either Lance is owed it, or we're owed it.

Why are you so afraid of vindication? Why are you so quick to say "no, we're good"? If I were a wrongly accused man, I'd want the US Atty's head on a spit.

But nobody has been accused! And the GJ is both an investigative and accusatory tool! And it was used as an investigatory tool in this case!

Why are you [FILL IN THE BLANK]?

 

[BotanyBay]

um. like.... not his assistants?

Maybe his brain told him it was going to be messy, expensive, and not very fruitful.

Then his brain told him about 2 years too late. His indecision has cost two different camps many millions of dollars. And I'd like to know more about that.

But you guys, you always say "uh, no, no, nope, no n no n no no no, um..................nope!"

 

[BotanyBay]

But nobody has been accused! And the GJ is both an investigative and accusatory tool! And it was used as an investigatory tool in this case!

Why are you [FILL IN THE BLANK]?

If you believe that, then ask for a full review of this travesty of justice. An innocent man has been wronged and he spent millions defending himself before even one charge was leveled.

 

[Race Radio]

Actually this is so far from the truth of what happened. This decision to close the investigation is almost 9 months old. Back then a few fought and actually got their way to continue. The media continues to skew the truth or at least timing...

......Link?

While you are at it could you tell us when they are going to close the USADA case and the Qui Tam case so we don't waste our time on that stuff?

 

[MarkvW]

Yeah dude, it was reviewed by Asst. Attorney General Lanny Breuer, Mark Fabiani's buddy!

Actually it was "reviewed" by Breuer before Birrote ever saw it...

GTFOH!

Ah, but where do Cameron Diaz and Eddy Merckx fit in?

 

[BotanyBay]

And the GJ is both an investigative and accusatory tool!

A competent US Atty does not use it as the primary investigative tool. It is generally only used that way to get "reluctant" witnesses to provide truthful testimony when they have been otherwise very reluctant to do so.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

But nobody has been accused! And the GJ is both an investigative and accusatory tool! And it was used as an investigatory tool in this case!

Why are you [FILL IN THE BLANK]?

YO, maybe you can fill us in on wtf is going on with this $2,200 worth of personal training birrote was doing a couple of years ago.

http://www.mainjustice.com/2010/01/15/meet-andre-birotte-jr/

http://trainwesthollywood.com/trainers/andre-birotte-jr/

Notice the "Train West Hollywood" logo on Pharmstrong's cap.

http://nyvelocity.com/content/toto/2012/toto-turns-250

 

[Race Radio]

If you believe that, then ask for a full review of this travesty of justice. An innocent man has been wronged and he spent millions defending himself before even one charge was leveled.

This really needs to happen.

If what Goober claims is true the Government just wasted $$$$ on a case they knew was going to be dismissed 9 months ago.

There should be a full investigation. Goober, are you willing to testify?

 

[BotanyBay]

This really needs to happen.

If what Goober claims is true the Government just wasted $$$$ on a case they knew was going to be dismissed 9 months ago.

There should be a full investigation. Goober, are you willing to testify?

They're either inept, or they're thugs. And I want neither kind in this particular office. So I want to find out. And so should everyone else.

 

[scribe]

This really needs to happen.

If what Goober claims is true the Government just wasted $$$$ on a case they knew was going to be dismissed 9 months ago.

There should be a full investigation. Goober, are you willing to testify?

RR: If you were in charge of calling up investigations, the budgeting office for the justice department would have a cow.

You'd make McCarthy blush.

 

[Pazuzu]

This release reinforces how I need to tell my children 'that life can be so very unfair and they need to deal with confusing and bizarre outcomes. That there are sad, really sad, people in the world and some of the them are very powerful."

What a missed opportunity. What a insult to justice.

Couldn't agree more. People always like to point out how sports can build character and instill work ethic, and in some instances - usually where little or no money is invovled - this is true. But in the case of Armstrong the moral of story is that if you're willing to lie, cheat and bully people you can get far in this world.

At least in baseball, guys like Clemons and Bonds - even though the legal cases against them had less than satisfactory outcomes, and their pharmaceutically assisted records haven't been taken from them - a strong message can be sent by keeping them out of the Hall of Fame, thus denying them of their sport's highest honor.

 

[BotanyBay]

Goober, are you willing to testify?

He's thinking.