USADA - Armstrong

[Semper Fidelis]

Big news comming

You predicting stuff again?

 

[LauraLyn]

I may be wrong on this - but todays extension was offered by USADA.
So therefore it would be subject to Colorado time, which is an extra hour as its Mountain Daylight Time.

If so then this is the correct time http://www.happyzebra.com/timezones-worldclock/currentlocal.php?city=denver

If Cinderella can't get her high heels to work by midnight, it means that Johan Bruyneel, Pedro Celaya, and Luis Garcia del Moral will not be showing up to the litigation ball this fall.

[The one unknown here is del Moral. He may not be so happy Lance threw him under the bus with Ferrari and Marti, while Lance reached out (with promises) to save Bruyneel and Celaya. Del Moral woke up late to the game, but he might be back in it with a vendetta (is that the right word?).]

 

[LauraLyn]

Did you read Judge Sparks' opinion? The only thing regarding "jurisdiction" that was decided there was that arbitration was the place to determine whether or not USADA has authority to bring the charges set forth in its charging letter. Thus, "all the arguments about jurisdiction" have not even been addressed yet, let alone lost.

Apologies. This is confusing.

What arguments regarding jurisdiction are left?

 

[goober]

You predicting stuff again?

I guess I am ... based on factual information tho... Guess there is a possibility it does not happen...

 

[DirtyWorks]

Big news comming

The last time your claims were substantially false with a sky-high confidence level. How will they be different this time?

 

[goober]

The last time your claims were substantially false with a sky-high confidence level. How will they be different this time?

What time was that - when I said Federal Investigation will be closed the week of Thanksgiving? Well my timing was off BUT it was supposed to be closed THAT WEEK. Took a little longer... I cannot control the people involved.

 

[serottasyclist]

Apologies. This is confusing.

What arguments regarding jurisdiction are left?

The critical argument: whether USADA has jurisdiction to pursue its charges of doping against Lance Armstrong.

There are two ways to fight jurisdiction: you show up to court and argue that the court doesn't have jurisdiction, or you completely ignore the court and any judgement that court files against you. The problem with showing up to court to argue is that if that court decides it does have jurisdiction -- well, now you're there and kind of have to take part in the game. Lance attempted to go to an alternative court (U.S. district court, rather than the arbitration) and have that alternative court say that USADA did not have jurisdiction. That alternative court said "we don't have jurisdiction to determine if USADA has jurisdiction, you've gotta go back to the original court (i.e., arbitration)."

 

[python]

Just heard that Travis is in absolute destitution after reading goober's post.

 

[Kennf1]

I guess I am ... based on factual information tho... Guess there is a possibility it does not happen...

So you're saying there will either be big news, or there won't?

 

[LauraLyn]

What time was that - when I said Federal Investigation will be closed the week of Thanksgiving? Well my timing was off BUT it was supposed to be closed THAT WEEK. Took a little longer... I cannot control the people involved.

Thanksgiving 2013 is a possibility. But that is probably rushing it.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Perhaps a charity could be set up? We could sell bracelets made of little yellow plastic dimes.

I was thinking more along the lines of putting a six-pack ring on your wrist...

 

[goober]

So you're saying there will either be big news, or there won't?

Yeah lol - guess that is it... Want to know what is going to happen? I am trolling for you guys to crave the information...

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

Yeah lol - guess that is it... Want to know what is going to happen? I am trolling for you guys to crave the information...

JUst hung up with Travis. Would you please call him to tell him what's up.

 

[QuickStepper]

Apologies. This is confusing.

What arguments regarding jurisdiction are left?

Um, all of them. Judge Sparks' decision makes clear that whatever issues remain about the jurisdiction of USADA to bring the charges against Armstrong which have been asserted are subject to being resolved in arbitration, but not in federal court (at least not now, and not without a further factual showing that USADA has failed to follow its own rules as set forth in the Protocols, etc.).

In short, all jurisdictional issues regarding the fundamental dispute involving USADA and Armstrong, remain in play and subject to being heard and decided, but just in the context of arbitration.

And this, Laura, is why everyone here who has opined on the subject also suggests that if Armstrong intends to appeal any decision to the CAS that he will not allow the arbitration to proceed by way of default. If he does, then CAS may not have a basis to consider the appeal because Armstrong will have failed to exhaust his legal remedies in the context of the arbitration.

It's also why, if Armstrong ever hopes to have a chance to re-file in federal court in an attempt to persuade any federal judge that USADA has failed to provide adequate due process or that the arbitration is indeed unfair, he will also not let the matter go by default.

You are correct about one thing: At the moment, his only real viable choice is to participate in the USADA arbitration (either in the U.S., or directly before CAS if USADA is still offering that as a concession which it did during arguments in the now-dismissed federal case).

To put this slightly differently, the only "jurisdictional" question that was resolved was Judge Sparks' conclusion that the federal district court did not have jurisdiction to hear any of the disputes between Armstrong and USADA, because those matters had to be resolved in arbitration. Otherwise, nothing else was resolved and it all remains open....at least for now and unless Armstrong idioltically decides not to do anything further.

I would agree that if he opts to do nothing, and elects not to arbitrate, he will be sanctioned by USADA and then will have nothing to appeal, at least nothing that I think will be "appealable" to any body or juridical body that will have any relevance.

 

[goober]

Just heard that Travis is in absolute destitution after reading goober's post.

Yes - Travis has no clue. Factual.

 

[DirtyWorks]

What time was that - when I said Federal Investigation will be closed the week of Thanksgiving? Well my timing was off BUT it was supposed to be closed THAT WEEK. Took a little longer... I cannot control the people involved.

Please... A broken clock is right twice a day. I'm not going to detail the confidence at which you spouted things that turned out to be factually wrong.

BTW, I'm still not optimistic this particular episode in the story will end well. So, don't take my response as an us-vs-them reply.

 

[QuickStepper]

The critical argument: whether USADA has jurisdiction to pursue its charges of doping against Lance Armstrong.

There are two ways to fight jurisdiction: you show up to court and argue that the court doesn't have jurisdiction, or you completely ignore the court and any judgement that court files against you. The problem with showing up to court to argue is that if that court decides it does have jurisdiction -- well, now you're there and kind of have to take part in the game. Lance attempted to go to an alternative court (U.S. district court, rather than the arbitration) and have that alternative court say that USADA did not have jurisdiction. That alternative court said "we don't have jurisdiction to determine if USADA has jurisdiction, you've gotta go back to the original court (i.e., arbitration)."

Um, that's also not quite correct, at least not entirely. In the law at least, it's possible to contest jurisdiction by making a "special appearance" for the limited purpose of challenging jurisdiction. If you don't prevail on the jurisdictional issue, it doesn't constitute a general appearance for all purposes, and you still have not consented to the court's general jurisdiction to rule substantively on the matter. I am not sure whether this would also apply if Armstrong were to agree to participate in the arbitration and raise the jurisdictional issues there and I don't see anything in either the WADA Code, the USADA Protocols, or the AAA Rules which allow for such special appearances. But the arbitrators (who for the most part are lawyers) will no doubt be familiar with the concept, and could apply it to these proceedings if they chose to. Whether they would is another question though.

Likewise, even if Armstrong showed up to challenge jurisdiction and the issues were decided adversely to him in the context of arbitration, I don't think he would be "bound" to continue to proceed with the process. But if he backed out and refused to further participate, he might be held to a waiver of any further grounds to contest whatever the arbitrators decide, and I think he'd also forfeit his right to challenge any substantive penalty or sanctions in any CAS appeal he would later file. So yeah, it's a dangerous position for him to be in either way, because until you agree to submit, at least partially to the authority of the arbitrators, there's no real certainty what they will do and where the case will go procedurally.

 

[Kretch]

The 300,000 cycling fans dropped him years ago. The millions of cancer groupies are still willing dupes.

Spot-on. He has plenty of potential to maintain enough of a brand with enough people to keep the $ rolling in. He doesn't need cycling anymore.

We avid (or should that be rabid) cycling fans think this is all a big deal, but for Joe Public it aint. "He doped? So what. They all did."

 

[Darryl Webster]

Quick question. Am I correct today is the day Armstrong has to decide if he,s going to arbitration?..if that,s the case what time does he have to have lodged the decision? UK time here is 9.40pm.

 

[serottasyclist]

Um, that's also not quite correct, at least not entirely. In the law at least, it's possible to contest jurisdiction by making a "special appearance" for the limited purpose of challenging jurisdiction. If you don't prevail on the jurisdictional issue, it doesn't constitute a general appearance for all purposes, and you still have not consented to the court's general jurisdiction to rule substantively on the matter. I am not sure whether this would also apply if Armstrong were to agree to participate in the arbitration and raise the jurisdictional issues there and I don't see anything in either the WADA Code, the USADA Protocols, or the AAA Rules which allow for such special appearances. But the arbitrators (who for the most part are lawyers) will no doubt be familiar with the concept, and could apply it to these proceedings if they chose to. Whether they would is another question though.

Likewise, even if Armstrong showed up to challenge jurisdiction and the issues were decided adversely to him in the context of arbitration, I don't think he would be "bound" to continue to proceed with the process. But if he backed out and refused to further participate, he might be held to a waiver of any further grounds to contest whatever the arbitrators decide, and I think he'd also forfeit his right to challenge any substantive penalty or sanctions in any CAS appeal he would later file. So yeah, it's a dangerous position for him to be in either way, because until you agree to submit, at least partially to the authority of the arbitrators, there's no real certainty what they will do and where the case will go procedurally.

Thanks for clarifying. I have a "what if" question for you:

Suppose Armstrong refuses to participate in Arbitration and USADA sanctions. Then say triathalon governing body refuses to grant him a license, or ASO tries to sue him for return of prize money or something along those lines. Now Armstrong either files suit (instigates arbitration?) against governing body for their failure to grant license or defends suit filed by ASO saying that the USADA sanction is meaningless because USADA never had jurisdiction. What is the likelihood USADA could be joined to this later case?

I would think their only opportunity to participate would be through amicus brief. Thus, perhaps by waiting to fight jurisdiction when an alternative body tries to enforce the sanction, Lance would gain opportunity to fight the jurisdiction issue with attnys that haven't spent the last 10 years thinking about USADA's jurisdiction as USADA's attnys clearly have?

 

[LauraLyn]

When the Federal court dismisses that challenge without prejudice, and without deciding on the issue of whether or not USADA has a right to sanction you, you can certainly still pretend the sanction doesn't matter.

Ok. You are right. You can pretend anything you want.

It is just not a viable pretense. (Yes, even for Lance and the army of yellow bracelets.)

 

[serottasyclist]

Ok. You are right. You can pretend anything you want.

It is just not a viable pretense. (Yes, even for Lance and the army of yellow bracelets.)

Seems a more viable pretense to me than showing up to an arbitration run in accordance with rules that the Supreme Court have continually found to abide by principles of due process and allege that 10+ witnesses are all lying under oath in a consistant manner to protect/further their own interest and that you are the only believable witness. Not a good one, but it really seems like his best bet to me.

 

[LauraLyn]

The critical argument: whether USADA has jurisdiction to pursue its charges of doping against Lance Armstrong.

There are two ways to fight jurisdiction: you show up to court and argue that the court doesn't have jurisdiction, or you completely ignore the court and any judgement that court files against you. The problem with showing up to court to argue is that if that court decides it does have jurisdiction -- well, now you're there and kind of have to take part in the game. Lance attempted to go to an alternative court (U.S. district court, rather than the arbitration) and have that alternative court say that USADA did not have jurisdiction. That alternative court said "we don't have jurisdiction to determine if USADA has jurisdiction, you've gotta go back to the original court (i.e., arbitration)."

Right. (Not really, but let's pretend.) Anyway you solved it in a paragraph. Took a while.

There is only arbitration open to Lance. It won't be on his terms. And "jurisdiction" at arbitration will take less time than your paragraph. Enough silliness.

 

[ebandit]

go to Bed Darryl

Quick question. Am I correct today is the day Armstrong has to decide if he,s going to arbitration?..if that,s the case what time does he have to have lodged the decision? UK time here is 9.40pm.

Deadline Midnight US.......here in UK 6 0r 7am

 

[LauraLyn]

Seems a more viable pretense to me than showing up to an arbitration run in accordance with rules that the Supreme Court have continually found to abide by principles of due process and allege that 10+ witnesses are all lying under oath in a consistent manner to protect/further their own interest and that you are the only believable witness. Not a good one, but it really seems like his best bet to me.

Have you been sharing needles with Lance?