USADA - Armstrong

[Fortyninefourteen]

I don't mean be rude, Susan, but you don't have jurisdiction to issue any sanctions. My mate Paddy will back me up on this. I'll get him to write a letter confirming this as soon as he's sobered up enough to pick up a pen.

(Hopefully some time tomorrow.)

Read the application you filled out and signed to get on the Clinic forum. You agreed to all terms and conditions as they relates to jurisdiction, sanction, appeal, and arbitration.

I suggest you move forward with intimidation, and your 500 plus test results.

 

[Turner29]

I wouldn't be so sure - Judge Sparks said there was "not one name, not one event, not one date"- he clearly would like to see some substance to USADAs case. So, they may show one of the cards that they are holding.

Detailed charges and evidence are two different concepts.

For example -- Arrest Warrants:

An arrest warrant calls for the arrest and appearance before a judge of a particular person accused of a particular crime.

Warrants authorize police to arrest someone on sight. Individuals with an outstanding warrant for arrest may also turn themselves in. Arrest warrants may allow for you to post bail after your arrest.

A warrant for arrest is typically issued by a judge after a request by the police or other law enforcement agency. Arrest warrants must include evidence of probable cause ‒ often in the form of a signed affidavit ‒ that a specific crime was committed by a specific person.

No evidence needs to be submitted, merely an affidavit that a specific crime was committed by a specific person. Sparks simply wants additional details of the specific crimes committed by Armstrong.

 

[Turner29]

Good point, "not one name, not one event, not one date" - its a disgrace, what about due process.

Have you read the charging letter?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Read the application you filled out and signed to get on the Clinic forum. You agreed to all terms and conditions as they relates to jurisdiction, sanction, appeal, and arbitration.

I suggest you move forward with intimidation, and your 500 plus test results.

BikeRadar.com has just sent a letter to cyclingnews and Susan detailing how they were the first to discover the incivility, so this is far from over.

 

[Roland Rat]

You can't intimidate me......

Susan

Hey Susan..

..how's your cat?

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

BikeRadar.com has just sent a letter to cyclingnews and Susan detailing how they were the first to discover the incivility, so this is far from over.

What, my buddy Jeff? He and I go way back, he wouldn't do that to me, we're both on the same side.

Of course, I can always delay my ruling while I go check my bank account.... see if any new deposits have come in to buy a Troll Testing Machine or something......

Susan

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Hey Susan..

..how's your cat?

Considering she has already caught 7 mice the last few weeks, you should be worried.

 

[ElChingon]

What, my buddy Jeff? He and I go way back, he wouldn't do that to me, we're both on the same side.

Of course, I can always delay my ruling while I go check my bank account.... see if any new deposits have come in to buy a Troll Testing Machine or something......

Susan

Off topic.

Pot getting some Kettle...

Thread derailing by a mod? Never happens...

 

[D-Queued]

... Frankly, I've been surprised that USADA has been so reluctant to simply let it all out at this point, because the risk of "witness intimidation" would seem to be pretty small, given that every move Armstrong makes is going to be so closely scrutinized. He'd be an idiot to actually try to intimidate any of the 10+ former teammates at this point. ...

I thought you were following all this very closely.

He flew thousands of miles to confront Tyler Hamilton in a restaurant!

That didn't stop him from trying to intimidate Hamilton during the Federal investigation where he was potentially facing prison time. He got away with that scot free. So why would he not try the same tactic during the USADA investigation?

Hamilton is not the only person connected with this case to be followed, threatened, and harassed. There is a pattern of harassment that only enhances the conspiracy argument.

Boy, did I miss the bus on responding to this.

However, what everyone should have pointed out is that we agree with you.

Lance is an idiot.

Thank you for confirming your agreement with the rest of us.

Lance is a recidivist witness intimidater. In fact, there is at least one WHOLE THREAD on this in the Clinic.

Surprised that RR, for example, did not respond to your post. He has been 'outed' by Lance and his fans.

Other Clinic contributors that have clear examples of intimidation include Mike Anderson and Betsy Andreu. You know, 'fat, ugly and *****y' Betsy? Well, at least that is how Lance has characterized her for almost a decade now.

Oddly, Betsy Andreu looks thin, attractive and friendly...

Lance flew all the way to Detroit to listen to her deposition. That is a long way to go just to sit in the room to watch someone's deposition. Poor Frankie

There is the example of Tyler, as Alpe and Benotti have pointed out. What about Steve, Emma, and Stephanie? What about the conflict of interest in having Lance's lawyer as the sole representative for his ex in the losing Trek versus Lemond case? (Oh, yeah, Lance lost another one) No intimidation there, surely.

Lance is such an idiot that he couldn't imagine that Frankie's old lady would actually have a brain and that she would actually be honest. So how does he explain this?

Q. Why would Mr. Andreu say the same things, if you know?

A. Probably to support his wife, which I don't know if you're married or not, but --

Q. I am.

A. -- sometimes is required.

Bringing us up to the present, about the only rational thing that can explain Pat's crazier than Crazy Pat behavior recently is that Lance must have a knife to his jugular.

Dave.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Detailed charges and evidence are two different concepts.

For example -- Arrest Warrants:

An arrest warrant calls for the arrest and appearance before a judge of a particular person accused of a particular crime.

Warrants authorize police to arrest someone on sight. Individuals with an outstanding warrant for arrest may also turn themselves in. Arrest warrants may allow for you to post bail after your arrest.

A warrant for arrest is typically issued by a judge after a request by the police or other law enforcement agency. Arrest warrants must include evidence of probable cause ‒ often in the form of a signed affidavit ‒ that a specific crime was committed by a specific person.

No evidence needs to be submitted, merely an affidavit that a specific crime was committed by a specific person. Sparks simply wants additional details of the specific crimes committed by Armstrong.

The charges were laid out in the original correspondence sent to the USADA 6. Armstrong was hit with (IIRC) 6 charges.

The USADA/WADA rules are that LA et al could elect to go to arbitration, sign the sanctions or ignore them, thus being banned.
What LA is trying to do is get the Fed Court to say that process is not "due process". Which I don't think LAs team will do.

But LAs team have managed to raise (at least) one issue regarding 'normal' due process. On that issue, USADA may give a little more, without really having to reveal their hand.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Have you read the charging letter?

From Susan? I let the Clinic legal team here read it to me and they say she asked would I like to be the subject of a vendetta or a witch hunt.

All I want to know is who ratted me out - I suspect the Roland guy.

 

[krinaman]

There have been several posts claiming LA will get the evidence as soon as he agrees to arbitration. However, the other people charged in the same "doping conspiracy" that agreed to the arbritration have yet to see the evidence.

As for the due process rules it really depends on which set of rules applies. WADA's is vague "right to be informed in a fair and timely manner". UCI's is "earliest opportunity".

However, those rules really don't matter as LA is claiming a due process violation under the 5th amendment and common law. Which can be read in http://www.scribd.com/doc/99659810/Lance-Armstrong-v-USADA-Federal-TRO-Motion

It doesn't really matter if the USADA is following it's rules if those rules violate the 5th amendment like LA is claiming.

 

[Race Radio]

There have been several posts claiming LA will get the evidence as soon as he agrees to arbitration. However, the other people charged in the same "doping conspiracy" that agreed to the arbritration have yet to see the evidence.

............Link?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

There have been several posts claiming LA will get the evidence as soon as he agrees to arbitration. However, the other people charged in the same "doping conspiracy" that agreed to the arbritration have yet to see the evidence.

As for the due process rules it really depends on which set of rules applies. WADA's is vague "right to be informed in a fair and timely manner". UCI's is "earliest opportunity".

However, those rules really don't matter as LA is claiming a due process violation under the 5th amendment and common law. Which can be read in http://www.scribd.com/doc/99659810/Lance-Armstrong-v-USADA-Federal-TRO-Motion

It doesn't really matter if the USADA is following it's rules if those rules violate the 5th amendment like LA is claiming.

Well, thats obvious - however LAs legal team have yet to show this, despite repeated requests
You might want to catch up on the last 10 pages here.

 

[krinaman]

............Link?

http://www.aroundtherings.com/articles/view.aspx?id=40831

Likewise none of the other respondents have seen the evidence that USADA claims to have collected. Two of them are expected to file their defence by 15August 2012, yet still don’t know what is the evidence that USADA alleges to exist against them. It is amazing to see how USADA accuses the respondents of cover up whilst USADA refuses to reveal the evidence that it claims to exist.

Granted it's the UCI making the claim but I haven't seen the USADA or anybody else refute the claim.

 

[snackattack]

However, those rules really don't matter as LA is claiming a due process violation under the 5th amendment and common law. Which can be read in http://www.scribd.com/doc/99659810/Lance-Armstrong-v-USADA-Federal-TRO-Motion

It doesn't really matter if the USADA is following it's rules if those rules violate the 5th amendment like LA is claiming.

HURRAH, HURRAH ITS A ...

Ah, and don't forget the International agreements/conventions the US also is bound to.

 

[snackattack]

- however LAs legal team have yet to show this,

Nope them other side first have to come up with all of this and are to late already !

"I couldn't find anything but conclusions (in the charges)," Sparks said. "Not one name, not one event, not one date,” said Sparks.

If not Sparks takes the lead !

 

[Turner29]

There have been several posts claiming LA will get the evidence as soon as he agrees to arbitration. However, the other people charged in the same "doping conspiracy" that agreed to the arbritration have yet to see the evidence.

As for the due process rules it really depends on which set of rules applies. WADA's is vague "right to be informed in a fair and timely manner". UCI's is "earliest opportunity".

However, those rules really don't matter as LA is claiming a due process violation under the 5th amendment and common law. Which can be read in http://www.scribd.com/doc/99659810/Lance-Armstrong-v-USADA-Federal-TRO-Motion

It doesn't really matter if the USADA is following it's rules if those rules violate the 5th amendment like LA is claiming.

Not true. By virtue of holding a USA Cycling license, Lance Armstrong legally agreed to the rules and regulations of USA Cycling, which include jurisdiction of doping violations to the USADA and its arbitration process.

Regarding others indicted by the USADA who are seeking arbitration:

1) I would not trust one word of what any over them, or their lawyers state.

2) Only Johan Bruyneel and Pedro Ceyala filed a timely request for arbitration. Pepe Marti did so late. In both cases not much time has elapsed, about 6 weeks for Bruyneel and Ceyala.

3) The others, Dr. Garcia Del Moral and Dr. Ferrari did not choose arbitration and therefore accept the charges and punishment and do not have a right to evidence.

 

[Race Radio]

http://www.aroundtherings.com/articles/view.aspx?id=40831




Granted it's the UCI making the claim but I haven't seen the USADA or anybody else refute the claim.

Thanks for proving my point

Marti changed his mind on arbitration the same day as the UCI release this, how would he have received evidence yet? Let me know if you seen a comment from Bruyneel. Their Arbitration is not until Nov and USDA will put Armstrong first.

The tactic is obvious, delay Armstrong's case as long as possible but use Marti and Bruyneel to get the info so they can increase the harassment. Not going to work

 

[Turner29]

Arbitration, a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), is a legal technique for the resolution of disputes outside the courts, where the parties to a dispute refer it to one or more persons (the "arbitrators", "arbiters" or "arbitral tribunal"), by whose decision (the "award") they agree to be bound. It is a resolution technique in which a third party reviews the evidence in the case and imposes a decision that is legally binding for both sides and enforceable.

Other forms of ADR include mediation (a form of settlement negotiation facilitated by a neutral third party) and non-binding resolution by experts. Arbitration is often used for the resolution of commercial disputes, particularly in the context of international commercial transactions. The use of arbitration is also frequently employed in consumer and employment matters, where arbitration may be mandated by the terms of employment or commercial contracts.

Arbitration is a proceeding in which a dispute is resolved by an impartial adjudicator whose decision the parties to the dispute have agreed, or legislation has decreed, will be final and binding. There are limited rights of review and appeal of arbitration awards.

 

[Turner29]

Thanks for proving my point

Marti changed his mind on arbitration the same day as the UCI release this, how would he have received evidence yet? Let me know if you seen a comment from Bruyneel. Their Arbitration is not until Nov and USDA will put Armstrong first.

The tactic is obvious, delay Armstrong's case as long as possible but use Marti and Bruyneel to get the info so they can increase the harassment. Not going to work

RR -- spot on.

 

[snackattack]

The tactic is obvious, delay Armstrong's case as long as possible but use Marti and Bruyneel to get the info so they can increase the harassment. Not going to work

Not needed, Sparks demands all the evidence be presented NOW in public, as he should with his bosses on the radar for sure.

The enemy angered Sparks by refusing to present and will likely keep refusing as it is part of that unligit murky secret tribunal.

´Sparks decision is therefore glooming in advance for the enemy´

 

[MarkvW]

Not needed, Sparks demands all the evidence be presented NOW in public, as he should with his bosses on the radar for sure.

The enemy angered Sparks by refusing to present and will likely keep refusing as it is part of that unligit murky secret tribunal.

´Sparks decision is therefore glooming in advance for the enemy´

You're just making stuff up in an attempt to provoke an intemperate response.

 

[Page Mill Masochist]

Remember the movie, The Sting? It starred Paul Newman and Robert Redford, who cheated the cheaters.

With that in mind, it won't be enough to show that Armstrong doped and cheated if the goal is to bring him to karmic justice. Too many casual fans will conclude that Armstrong merely cheated the era's cheaters, thus is a kind of folk hero for doing it with such success.

That sums up the position of my bike mates in America who, not being blind or stupid, accept the facts of Armstrong's doping but nevertheless give him a pass. I would not call these people fanboys. They're just typical of many people who only want to get some fun and fitness out of biking and are not outraged by a "doper among dopers" at the sharp end of the sport.

As the USADA case progresses, it will be critical to show the conspiracy between Armstrong and UCI. That is what it will take to destroy LA's reputation, once and for all.

 

[Elagabalus]

You're just making stuff up in an attempt to provoke an intemperate response.

Heh ... that got him!

The clinic will now pause for a short recess to allow time for "the enemy" to look up the meaning of intemperate ...