USADA - Armstrong

[BroDeal]

Checkmate?

I said before that Armstrong trying to use Landis' email being sent to US Cycling before the USADA as evidence that USA Cycling uncovered the possible infraction was really weak. It is so easy to get around that argument.

 

[snackattack]

Either party will appeal Sparks decision.

District Court to Circuit Court
You can appeal a decision of the District Court to the Circuit Court within fourteen days of the date of the decision. The Circuit Court will conduct a full re-hearing but once a decision is given there is no further right of appeal (except on a point of law).

Ultimately this political witch-hunt ends up in the Supreme Court alike ECHR in Europa.

 

[MacRoadie]

The UCI, an entity which knows nothing about what Mr. Landis or any of USADA’s manywitnesses observed, an entity which never met with any witness and never conducted anyinvestigation, is claiming to have “discovered the violation” and yet at the same time the UCI is, as you said in your July 13, letter, unable to determine “whether or not an anti-doping violation has occurred.” So, in your own words UCI claims both to have “discovered” a violation and to not know whether a violation occurred. This is exactly the sort of “Never, Never Land” created by the UCI’s nonsensical discovery rule and it well illustrates why that rule cannot possibly be enforceable under the Code

I think I have a man-crush going on...

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I can share with you that a USADA representative met with an individual close to Mr. Landis (an individual who has incidentally never been a UCI license holder or official) weeks before the April 30 email was sent and in that meeting USADA received much of the same information from this intermediary that was subsequently contained in the email. USADA also met with Mr. Landis about ten days before the email was sent. Before the email was sent USADA had met with several others with relevant information.

Checkmate?

The 30th April email was always a load of nonsense (by UCI & LA) as it was clear in the email exchange that Lance & Radioshack(thanks ya'll) released (that would show the blackmail) that Floyd had been in touch with USADA.

Email from Floyd to Andrew Messick dated 22nd April 2010:
"Thanks for facilitating the meeting with USADA, I met with them on Tuesday in LA..."

In another email dated the 24th June 2010 -
"I'm in the process of arranging, within the next two weeks, another meeting with USADA in which I name the racers and staff who helped me to use performance enhancing drugs and avoid detection and am led to believe, by the stance that the Tour of California has taken, that you would be interested in joining us in that meeting so as to ascertain information about which teams to invite in the future.

I've taken the liberty because I assume your interests are aligned, to copy Steve Johnson on this note and I'm hopefull that unlike in the past he'll also be willing to join and be forthcoming about what he knows about the history of doping in cycling as well.
......"

 

[DirtyWorks]

Bingo! USADA suggests they go directly to CAS:

CAS is inevitable. Look at the shambles of an outcome they made of the Contador case. e.g. "It wasn't the meat, it was the explanation your team disgarded, tainted supplement."

Still, events should fire off several bonus rounds of litigation for Team Wonderboy. You have to wonder if Team Wonderboy has his own Fairness Fund. He's going to need it to hang onto more than 1 TdF win.

Per another post, I think they will fabricate an appeal to delay. If USADA is smart, they hold all hearings off so evidence doesn't leak.

 

[Weapons of @ss Destruction]

I think I have a man-crush going on...

I'm not even a U.S. citizen, but later today I might take a quick look at the USADA web site to see if there's some way I can send a token donation from the public for their general operations fund. Lovin' these guys.

 

[Roland Rat]

I'm not even a U.S. citizen, but later today I might take a quick look at the USADA web site to see if there's some way I can send a token donation from the public for their general operations fund. Lovin' these guys.

Yep, was thinking that myself...

 

[Deagol]

read WADA's letter to Pat McQuaid, page 4, 4th paragraph. There is some disturbing stuff in there about the UCI:

In both of these high profile cases (Floyd & Tyler), one of which ultimately resulted in the loss of a Tour de France title, UCI had the opportunity to participate as a party or an observer and, despite requests to participate and assist with the costs, chose not to do so and left the cases completely up to USADA. We can only imagine that if UCI had real concern about the USADA processes it would have taken part in those cases. We have never previously heard any complaint from you or anyone associated with the UCI in relation to the due process given in USADA proceedings which have to date been exemplary in terms of the process given to athletes and take place in front of reputable arbitration institutions.
....
By adopting its current position UCI is sadly destroying the credibility it has slowly been regaining in the past years in the fight against doping.

 

[Race Radio]

I've taken the liberty because I assume your interests are aligned, to copy Steve Johnson on this note and I'm hopefull that unlike in the past he'll also be willing to join and be forthcoming about what he knows about the history of doping in cycling as well.
......"[/I]

Hahahaha

Steve is sweating right now.

 

[Hmmmmm]

Is P-McQ Mensa or Mental?

He reminds me of an old chestnut...

'One rises through the ranks until they reach the level of their incompetence.'

"Austin... ? Aspen... ? We have a problem!"

In a move of pure genius I could see P & V selling the uniballer out. Stat.

"It was a deep cover operation. Very deep."

As to the first, probably both, as sometimes they go hand in hand.

As to the second bolded, the beloved Peter Principle.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Peter_Principle

 

[Deagol]

Hahahaha

Steve is sweating right now.

Hey, thanks for posting these legal docs, some very interesting reading.

RE: Steve Johnson.. I hope so. I have heard from a direct source that he was gloating after forcing the ACA (now defunct local Colorado/New Mexico/Wyoming independent racing organization) into folding into USAC because he threatened them with forming a rival local league to pull away race promoters and put the ACA out of business. Not doping related but still $%%^&

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Either party will appeal Sparks decision.

District Court to Circuit Court
You can appeal a decision of the District Court to the Circuit Court within fourteen days of the date of the decision. The Circuit Court will conduct a full re-hearing but once a decision is given there is no further right of appeal (except on a point of law).

Ultimately this political witch-hunt ends up in the Supreme Court alike ECHR in Europa.

No, no it doesn't. As I said over at Slowditch, the case law on the issue of when you may appeal regarding an arbitration is solid and comprehensive. If they appeal, they will lose and lose quickly. SCOTUS wouldn't even bother as the case law is clear and any attorney making a stupid argument against it is in danger of running up against a Rule 11 violation. Sorry, your scenario is pure fantasy.

 

[MarkvW]

CAS is inevitable. Look at the shambles of an outcome they made of the Contador case. e.g. "It wasn't the meat, it was the explanation your team disgarded, tainted supplement."

Still, events should fire off several bonus rounds of litigation for Team Wonderboy. You have to wonder if Team Wonderboy has his own Fairness Fund. He's going to need it to hang onto more than 1 TdF win.

Per another post, I think they will fabricate an appeal to delay. If USADA is smart, they hold all hearings off so evidence doesn't leak.

Don't fear an appeal. The only thing to be concerned about is a stay--and no judge is going to order a stay of USADA proceedings. The default is that USADA keeps rolling along.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Don't fear an appeal. The only thing to be concerned about is a stay--and no judge is going to order a stay of USADA proceedings. The default is that USADA keeps rolling along.

Ok. But I'm still waiting for a lightning strike event to shut this one down.

 

[thehog]

CAS is inevitable. Look at the shambles of an outcome they made of the Contador case. e.g. "It wasn't the meat, it was the explanation your team disgarded, tainted supplement."

Still, events should fire off several bonus rounds of litigation for Team Wonderboy. You have to wonder if Team Wonderboy has his own Fairness Fund. He's going to need it to hang onto more than 1 TdF win.

Per another post, I think they will fabricate an appeal to delay. If USADA is smart, they hold all hearings off so evidence doesn't leak.

Careful. This is not USADA v UCI.

It's USADA taking action against Armstrong. To get to CAS it has to go via the USADA hearing first.

CAS won't hear a claim on jurisdiction. They'll ask that the national federation to hear the case first before they arbitrate on the decision. CAS doesnt hear cases in the first instance. They are a court of appeal.

By which means the evidence is in public domain via the UsADA hearing and game over.

 

[Anonymous]

Could Bock's letter be any more of a ***** slap?

Maybe not so much a slap.

Paddy's spitting out his front teeth.

 

[snackattack]

No, no it doesn't. As I said over at Slowditch, the case law on the issue of when you may appeal regarding an arbitration is solid and comprehensive. If they appeal, they will lose and lose quickly. SCOTUS wouldn't even bother as the case law is clear and any attorney making a stupid argument against it is in danger of running up against a Rule 11 violation. Sorry, your scenario is pure fantasy.

Yes, yes it does and it will.

So we meet again here.

This is the Lawstrong route against tit for tat.

 

[MacRoadie]

Ultimately this political witch-hunt...

Oh God, not again...

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

Maybe not so much a slap.

Paddy's spitting out his front teeth.

...and rubbing his lower abdomen.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Yes, yes it does and it will.

So we meet again here.

This is the Lawstrong route against tit for tat.

Hey, everyone is entitled to not have any idea of what they are talking about. <- You are here.

...unless by "ends up in the Supreme Court" you mean "being denied Cert."...

BTW, there is a wealth of information in the answer USADA gave today regarding the actual case law that surrounds arbitration decisions by SCOTUS and Appeals Courts. If you want less egg on your face (I don't think the egg bothers you at all), read up on it. You will stop making statements that are not based in reality or law.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Careful. This is not USADA v UCI.

It's USADA taking action against Armstrong. To get to CAS it has to go via the USADA hearing first.

CAS won't hear a claim on jurisdiction. They'll ask that the national federation to hear the case first before they arbitrate on the decision. CAS doesnt hear cases in the first instance. They are a court of appeal.

By which means the evidence is in public domain via the UsADA hearing and game over.

Careful - because "Dirtyworks" is correct.
CAS is not just a court of Appeal - its as its title suggests, the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
USADA have said in their reply that they would agree to have CAS arbitrate if the parties agree.

Page 30;

USADA recognizes, however, that both the UCI and Mr. Armstrong have already confirmed thatthey have faith in, and have agreed to, CAS arbitration. Accordingly, USADA proposes that it is willing to agree to a single, final and binding CAS hearing with Mr. Armstrong under U.S. law and the USADA Protocol and held in the U.S. but with international CAS arbitrators in which the issues would be whether Mr. Armstrong committed anti-doping rule violations and, if so, the appropriate sanctions.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Yes, yes it does and it will.

So we meet again here.

This is the Lawstrong route against tit for tat.

The USADA is playing him and his wacky band of clowns like a violin. It would be sad if it weren't for the fact that they are taking down a needle freak lying sociopath...

 

[thehog]

Careful - because "Dirtyworks" is correct.
CAS is not just a court of Appeal - its as its title suggests, the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
USADA have said in their reply that they would agree to have CAS arbitrate if the parties agree.

Page 30;

Steady on. USADA are offering CAS if all parties agree (including CAS) as a one off. It's not standard practice. You as well myself know USADA are only offering such an offer to corner the UCI/Armstrong argument.

What they are saying is: "arbritration one way or the other".

It's also to show the judge there spirit for fairness and to determine the correct result.

CAS by its own determination is a court of appeal.

 

[MarkvW]

Yes, yes it does and it will.

So we meet again here.

This is the Lawstrong route against tit for tat.

Appeal doesn't help Livestrong, Inc. unless it is accompanied by a stay.

 

[MacRoadie]

USADA proposes that it is willing to agree to a single, final and binding CAS hearing with Mr. Armstrong under U.S. law and the USADA Protocol and held in the U.S. but with international CAS arbitrators in which the issues would be whether Mr. Armstrong committed anti-doping rule violations and, if so, the appropriate sanctions.

My read of that, while admitting that the term "CAS hearing" is used, is that the protocol, law, and location will be exactly the same as a "regular" USADA arbitration. The only concession being the use of CAS arbitrators (if that's really a concession at all since they're bound by the USADA protocol and US law).