USADA - Armstrong

[Zam_Olyas]

Cannot get better than this

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Billable hours

In the end its always the lawyers that win.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

What does it mean. Will they stop USADA? I hope not....

P.S.: Gimme hope RR and Hog!

 

[Anonymous]

• The agency is violating Armstrong’s constitutional Fifth Amendment rights. That amendment guarantees, in part, that no person shall be “twice put in jeopardy of life or limb … be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

Lol. You'd think, for a thousand dollars an hour, LA's attorney would know this is not a criminal case.

 

[HL2037]

Oh FFS why can't he just take his punishment like a big boy like so many other dopers have done before him.

 

[Anonymous]

USADA lacks jurisdiction to investigate and penalize Armstrong. It says that any investigation must come from the International Cycling Union, based upon language in the annual licenses each rider signs. The UCI’s main office is in Switzerland, and the motion says that the cycling union has indicated no plans to pursue a case against Armstrong, who retired from the sport in February of 2011.

The blood screens from 2009-10 were collected and analyzed by the UCI. There were no irregularities found by the UCI and the results were posted on its website and those maintained by Armstrong and his team. The blood then was discarded and is no longer available to be tested.

Meanwhile, the UCI says the USADA has the power to bann Bruyneel...

Funny **** right here.

 

[ManInFull]

Lancearmstrong has filed for federal injunction to halt usada's case, saying it's unconstitutional

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/cont...2012/07/09/lance_armstrongs_lawyers_file.html

It's amazing what you can do when you have lots of money. I would not be shocked if this comes to end before it really gets started. Maybe we'll get our hands on the testimony from other other riders at some point in the future. Of course, his legal team will be working to ensure that never happens...

 

[Ferminal]

Wait, so they are bringing into question the entire anti-doping process? Big ramifications for everyone if successful.

 

[thehog]

What does it mean. Will they stop USADA? I hope not....

P.S.: Gimme hope RR and Hog!

The UCI angle is a good one. Didn’t think of that. However USADA in the first instance are responsible for opening proceedings. But as previously suggested you can’t file an injunction until the actual “unfairness” that one claims plays out. ie – he’s forward projecting the “unfairness”.

I suspect a Federal Judge would want to see it play out first before ruling. But this in Armstrong and it was filed in his home state so him might actually know the judge and he’ll lock the thing up in legal wrangles to 2020.

 

[Race Radio]

Many athletes have tried the same route, they have all failed. Armstrong will fail as well.

Armstrong thinks the process is unfair because he is unable to corrupt it.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Yea, he sounds scared.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

The UCI angle is a good one. Didn’t think of that. However USADA in the first instance are responsible for opening proceedings. But as previously suggested you can’t file an injunction until the actual “unfairness” that one claims plays out. ie – he’s forward projecting the “unfairness”.

I suspect a Federal Judge would want to see it play out first before ruling. But this in Armstrong and it was filed in his home state so him might actually know the judge and he’ll lock the thing up in legal wrangles to 2020.

Many athletes have tried the same route, they have all failed. Armstrong will fail as well.

Armstrong thinks the process is unfair because he is unable to corrupt it.

So it´s 50/50. Another Q: Why then does not WADA follow and try it in good ol europe? They really hate him here. He´s have no chance in germany for example.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

The blood then was discarded and is no longer available to be tested.

In some ways you (almost) have to admire their brazeness.

 

[Jeremiah]

The UCI angle is a good one. Didn’t think of that. However USADA in the first instance are responsible for opening proceedings. But as previously suggested you can’t file an injunction until the actual “unfairness” that one claims plays out. ie – he’s forward projecting the “unfairness”.

I suspect a Federal Judge would want to see it play out first before ruling. But this in Armstrong and it was filed in his home state so him might actually know the judge and he’ll lock the thing up in legal wrangles to 2020.

Which is even worse for Armstrong. Riders will finally start to get it and will start openly coming out against armstrong.

Fortunately for everyone, armstrong included, it won't come to that.

 

[Anonymous]

There better be more to the injunction than what is being reported.

Every single bullet point is easily refuted, irrelevant or alleged but unknown.

Weak sauce Lance. Best of luck though.

 

[Anonymous]

In some ways you (almost) have to admire their brazeness.

Desperate times call for desperate measures.

 

[thehog]

So it´s 50/50. Another Q: Why then does not WADA follow and try it in good ol europe? They really hate him here. He´s have no chance in germany for example.

Although a long time ago if you get the chance read up on the Butch Reynolds federal case. Very difficult to prove unfairness in the process when you sign up to it and complete under those terms.

 

[Race Radio]

Tygart/USADA comment on Armstrong injunction:

"Like previous lawsuits aimed at concealing the truth, this lawsuit is without merit."

 

[ManInFull]

There better be more to the injunction than what is being reported.

Every single bullet point is easily refuted, irrelevant or alleged but unknown.

Weak sauce Lance. Best of luck though.

I hope that you're right. But, all it takes is for the judge to be open to Lance's argument...

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Although a long time ago if you get the chance read up on the Butch Reynolds federal case. Very difficult to prove unfairness in the process when you sign up to it and complete under those terms.

Ok, that´s hope. So basically if his corrupted buddy in Austin stops USADA, WADA can step in and sue him in europe or wherever?

 

[Race Radio]

Although a long time ago if you get the chance read up on the Butch Reynolds federal case. Very difficult to prove unfairness in the process when you sign up to it and complete under those terms.

And Mary Decker and Trevor Graham....and many more.

Dopers who try to clog the toilet fail

 

[MarkvW]

Lancearmstrong has filed for federal injunction to halt usada's case, saying it's unconstitutional

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/cont...2012/07/09/lance_armstrongs_lawyers_file.html

Still, the big question is whether or not Armstrong is going to contest the USADA proceedings.

It looks like Lance isn't going to pay anyone else's legal freight. It's 'every man for himself.'

It looks like Lance is trying to kill USADA. He's claiming that USADA has no jurisdiction over him.

This is really full ***.

I wonder what's going to happen with respect to the Co-Cons (and disclosure of the facts relating to them).

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Dr Ferrari not forbidden?

on another point - since Pozzato is saying:

Pozzato claimed that he didn’t know that it was forbidden to frequent him [Dr. Ferrari]. "I’ve looked but found nothing about it in the CONI or UCI papers.

Listen, I race with a load of riders and directeurs sportifs, who have had long suspensions for heavy acts of doping,” he said. “Why should I feel uneasy about being trained by someone who has never been condemned and who has never made a mistake. Work is work.

Surely Lance will argue the same.

 

[Race Radio]

There better be more to the injunction than what is being reported.

Every single bullet point is easily refuted, irrelevant or alleged but unknown.

Weak sauce Lance. Best of luck though.

The "Double Jeopardy" claim is comedy gold.

Funny how the Washington Post article has 15 comments, all Pro Armstrong, within 10 minutes of going live

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

The "Double Jeopardy" claim is comedy gold.

Funny how the Washington Post article has 15 comments, all Pro Armstrong, within 10 minutes of going live

Why is it not double jeopardy? I mean i really hate this cheater, but it sounds reasonable defense