USADA - Armstrong

[Big Doopie]

Time for SCA to fire up the lawsuit machine

i believe this can only happen if aso and uci agree to take away tour wins officially.

sca lost -- not based on doping. doping never was the issue as it was not written into the contract. as long as armstrong is the official winner of the tours in question, sca has no argument, unfortunately.

the aso and uci would have to agree to strip the tour victories -- something that no matter what usada determines, is still very much in doubt.

 

[MarkvW]

Agreed. Basically some form of "I am taking my toys and going home" Waaaaa

Time for SCA to fire up the lawsuit machine

I guess we'll see. But that same reasoning ought to have persuaded Armstrong not to file that idiotic, public relations nightmare of a loser federal lawsuit.

Lance has gone full *** so far. Why would he stop now?

 

[70kmph]

He ends up as a cashier at a place called Mellow Johnnys...

"Well I used to be a famous road bike racer, now this is all thats left. People still drop by to say hello."

 

[alberto.legstrong]

Nope, You make a claim. When asked to support that claim you produce nothing to support your claim but rambling posts that contribute nothing to the discussion.

Mission accomplish, you were able to get others to respond to your babble

Not joking, I literally saw this snip several pages on from here....

You make a claim. When asked to support that claim you produce nothing to support your claim but rambling posts that contribute nothing to the discussion.

Mission accomplish, you were able to get others to respond to your babble

and was actually under the impression you were making a retort to Armstrong's legal maneuvering and arguments without merit, and I read backwards (Hey! I'm not the only one here who reads threads backwards) and find out you were actually referencing Apropssheensis! Is Afro actually Lance? ?? ?

Perhaps the Lance army has learnt to mimic Armstrong's logic.

 

[Kender]

i like the bit where sparks has a dig at 'the will of congress"

they need to stay out of it and sparks agrees

 

[MacRoadie]

i like the bit where sparks has a dig at 'the will of congress"

they need to **** out of it and sparks agrees

But see, that means they ARE a State Actor! It's all a vendetta and a conspiracy and a witch hunt and Sparks' Order is appealable!

 

[MarkvW]

Agreed. Basically some form of "I am taking my toys and going home" Waaaaa

Time for SCA to fire up the lawsuit machine

Why, then, on page 2, does he write:

The Court finds: (1) Armstrong's due process claims lack merit; and (2) the Court lacks jurisdiction over Armstrong's remaining claims..."

Why make the distinction? Why does he not simply state that the Court lacks jurisdiction over ALL (or ANY) of Armstrong's claims?

Further, why does he specifically say that they "lack merit"? Why say anything beyond the Court's lack of jurisdiction?

And again, while not trying to be argumentative, you specifically stated that the judge neither accepted nor rejected the due process claim (your words), yet the order very clearly reads:

"The Court rejects Armstrong's due process claims, to the extent that they challenge USADA's arbitration procedures".

Once again, it doesn't say "The Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to rule on Armstrong's due process claims, to the extent that they challenge USADA's arbitration procedures."

Also, wasn't the whole meat of Armstrong's due process claim related to the USADA arbitration procedure?

I've got to look at again. It's fundamental, though, that once a federal court determines that it has no jurisdiction, it only has authority to announce that fact and stop. I'll look at it again.

 

[MacRoadie]

I've got to look at again. It's fundamental, though, that once a federal court determines that it has no jurisdiction, it only has authority to announce that fact and stop. I'll look at it again.

Fair enough. Take a look at the second paragraph on Page 18 as well. It reads, in toto:

On balance, the Court finds the USDA arbitration rules, which largely follow those of the American Arbitration Association (AAA), are sufficiently robust to satisfy the requirements of due process (emphasis added). The Court therefore rejects Armstrong's due process claims, to the extent they challenge USADA's arbitration procedures. Accordingly, the Court grants USADA's motion and dismisses those claims without prejudice. The court turns now to Armstrong's remaining claims.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Again, he is working on his speech right now

Tell them to start cutting up the onions.

"It is with regret that I have to make a confession to the American public.
I understand many of you will feel angry and betrayed.
However, with a heavy heart I must now admit- I have never ever drank Micheal-Ultra. It is complete dog wee, I did it for the money - and the 82 billion who could get cancer."

 

[Race Radio]

i believe this can only happen if aso and uci agree to take away tour wins officially.

sca lost -- not based on doping. doping never was the issue as it was not written into the contract. as long as armstrong is the official winner of the tours in question, sca has no argument, unfortunately.

the aso and uci would have to agree to strip the tour victories -- something that no matter what usada determines, is still very much in doubt.

The UCI does not have a choice, they have to strip his record.

SCA will not only go after 2005 but also the other years that they paid out prior to filing their suit

And then comes the Times of London...and then the sponsors....and then the Feds.

 

[Velodude]

Yes, we know that. But it continues to point out, by yet another impartial logical person, that the USADA had no intentions to even follow its own procedures for arbitration. It comes off as entirely arbitrary and seemingly vendetta based.

That is the judges point. A judge can throw statements and viewpoints in his written opinion, which he did. He also could have chosen NOT to write anything but the basic opinion and ruling of the suit, and be done with it.

So the fact that he wrote more on the subject and showed concerns, and then got the USADA to "assure" him they will provide evidence before the arbitration and follow basic rules/standards of such also says a great deal about the process in general.

This is completely valid.

Ziggy:

USADA's conduct towards LA cannot be vendetta based as USADA's case was reviewed, as required, by an independent panel to determine if Armstrong had a case to answer before USADA could charge Armstrong.

The Judge had in his possession a charging letter which he viewed was inadequate but obviously accepted USADA's defense that Armstrong had a past record of intimidation towards witnesses.

Sparks' concerns in his judgment towards USADA are only prospective if Armstrong is not presented with the evidence sufficient enough to support their case.

Having been screened by an independent panel he would be confident this would occur but provided a warning to balance.

 

[alberto.legstrong]

The big Q now is, will he accept the ban or go for a public hearing?

My fear is, he will accept the ban, and all evidence is hidden forever.
In this case, can USADA strip him at least of his 7 TdF titles?

If it was asked before, sorry. But with 900 pages, it is difficult to keep an overview...

I give zero likelihood he will go to arbitration. My question is can the USADA air its evidence if he elects that option?

Is it possible he and the USADA come to some sort of detente that prevents evidence from coming to light? A non-admission admission in return for stopping the endless legal wrangling he can rain on them and keeping the evidence hidden away so his lemmings can continue worshipping him and he continues to earn a living off of it?

 

[MacRoadie]

Ziggy:

USADA's conduct towards LA cannot be vendetta based as USADA's case was reviewed, as required, by an independent panel to determine if Armstrong had a case to answer before USADA could charge Armstrong.

The Judge had in his possession a charging letter which he viewed was inadequate but obviously accepted USADA's defense that Armstrong had a past record of intimidation towards witnesses.

Sparks' concerns in his judgment towards USADA are only prospective if Armstrong is not presented with the evidence sufficient enough to support their case.

Having been screened by an independent panel he would be confident this would occur but provided a warning to balance.

The point of the matter is that the charging leter is akin to the police arresting you. They don't need to provide you with any evidence. Further, when you are actually "charged" with a criminal offence there is still no requirement that you be shown evidence against you, you are simply apprised of the charges.

Due process.

 

[Race Radio]

I give zero likelihood he will go to arbitration. My question is can the USADA air its evidence if he elects that option?

Is it possible he and the USADA come to some sort of detente that prevents evidence from coming to light? A non-admission admission in return for stopping the endless legal wrangling he can rain on them and keeping the evidence hidden away so his lemmings can continue worshipping him and he continues to earn a living off of it?

Yes, they can and will air it

 

[goober]

Ziggy:

USADA's conduct towards LA cannot be vendetta based as USADA's case was reviewed, as required, by an independent panel to determine if Armstrong had a case to answer before USADA could charge Armstrong.

The Judge had in his possession a charging letter which he viewed was inadequate but obviously accepted USADA's defense that Armstrong had a past record of intimidation towards witnesses.

Sparks' concerns in his judgment towards USADA are only prospective if Armstrong is not presented with the evidence sufficient enough to support their case.

Having been screened by an independent panel he would be confident this would occur but provided a warning to balance.

Sparks' had other concerns...

What concerns me the most is why USADA is only going after Armstrong and Co. when there is 10x the evidence around another set of riders and team manager, etc. This tells me USADA is not just doing their job and there is some kind of motivation (duh); but, USADA is not just working anti-doping here... Maybe more is coming...

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

The UCI does not have a choice, they have to strip his record.

SCA will not only go after 2005 but also the other years that they paid out prior to filing their suit

And then comes the Times of London...and then the sponsors....and then the Feds.

And....every other business or individual that was falsely induced into a contract or a donation based on his performances / recovery / as a clean athlete and spokesperson.

The cascade of law suits could be massive. Enough to keep his lawyers as busy as they are today for quite a while.....I wonder what their war room sounds like today?

 

[Benotti69]

I give zero likelihood he will go to arbitration. My question is can the USADA air its evidence if he elects that option?

Is it possible he and the USADA come to some sort of detente that prevents evidence from coming to light? A non-admission admission in return for stopping the endless legal wrangling he can rain on them and keeping the evidence hidden away so his lemmings can continue worshipping him and he continues to earn a living off of it?

What planet you on? Obviously Planet Armstrong!

Earn a living? Defrauding people of millions you mean! FFS. What a door handle!

 

[alberto.legstrong]

Yes, they can and will air it

that's pretty much as good as it gets at this point. The lemmings will continue to be lemmings, others are going to continue to try and tear him down (deservedly, imo) but there are a lot of non-lemmings who have no idea and no opinion either way and those are the ones that will write the history of his legacy: the vast majority of disinterested and uninterested parties. It is not going to go well for 'Mr' Armstrong once it finally all comes out.

 

[roadfreak44]

Sparks' had other concerns...

What concerns me the most is why USADA is only going after Armstrong and Co. when there is 10x the evidence around another set of riders and team manager, etc. This tells me USADA is not just doing their job and there is some kind of motivation (duh); but, USADA is not just working anti-doping here... Maybe more is coming...

One would hope there would be some impartiality but probably not given Tygarts public statements to the effect that his perception of Armstrongs guilt is not related to an investigation but a foregone conclusion. I cant help but wonder why Tiger woods hasnt been investigated. Dont know if golf falls under the purview of USADA but that guy is CLEARLY on drugs. Odd that a figure like that who offered deranged behavior and oddly olympian performances
bears no scrutiny...

 

[alberto.legstrong]

What planet you on? Obviously Planet Armstrong!

Earn a living? Defrauding people of millions you mean! FFS. What a door handle!

ge a freaking grip and stop reading everything I write !

 

[Velodude]

Sparks' had other concerns...

What concerns me the most is why USADA is only going after Armstrong and Co. when there is 10x the evidence around another set of riders and team manager, etc. This tells me USADA is not just doing their job and there is some kind of motivation (duh); but, USADA is not just working anti-doping here... Maybe more is coming...

It is like government corporate regulators in pursuit of white collar crime by corporation controllers.

Ther resources are finite so they set internal parameters with the main emphasis of the monetary fraud being over a high threshold and the case would be of a character that would attract media attention.

A stronger message is sent to charge and prosecute high fliers than have resources expended on thousands of non descripts.

 

[Benotti69]

ge a freaking grip and stop reading everything I write !

the comedy value is worth the read

 

[Robert21]

SCA will not only go after 2005 but also the other years that they paid out prior to filing their suit. And then comes the Times of London...

I am pretty sure that under UK's ridiculous libel laws, specifically designed to protect the powerful, it doesn't matter if an allegation or inferred allegation is subsequently shown to have been true: all that matters is whether the allegation can be proven to be true at the time it is made. If not a libel has been committed and the subsequent emergence of new evidence would not change this.

 

[BroDeal]

The UCI does not have a choice, they have to strip his record.

SCA will not only go after 2005 but also the other years that they paid out prior to filing their suit

And then comes the Times of London...and then the sponsors....and then the Feds.

I cannot see sponsors suing except in a special case or two. Radio Shack is hurting financially, so maybe it would have an incentive to recoup money. Other sponsors would be worried that the damage to their brand amongst Armstrong's fans would outweigh the money that could be won. The money has already been spent. The advertising rewards have been reaped. It is opening a big can of worms. Maybe if Armstrong turns into John Edwards there will be an incentive to pile on.

Companies like SRAM could use the threat of a lawsuit to force Armstrong out of his ownership stake.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

I don't know if it was part of their plan but it seems a good move on the part of USADA to date Armstrong's offences back to 1998. Even if it's something that might not hold up at CAS, as far forcing Armstrong into arbitration it's significant, if it was one title he might let it go and just say USADA are corrupt.

That would be a nasty plan.
But it´s possible.

Hi FoxxyBrown, you appear to have won the most replies award with this.

Bottom line, much of the evidence is already known.
...

Yes. Thank you all.

Yeah it´s known, but PR & Teflon Armstrong made it go away up to now.

Yes, they can and will air it

Always optimistic. I like that...