USADA - Armstrong

[Kender]

Interesting possibility with the extension. Will USADA delay the cases against Bruyneel and Celaya to coincide with Armstrong?

If not, then the witnesses (Tyler, Floyd, Levi, George, etc.) that likely would testify in those cases would become public before Armstrong's arbitration. Would give him the opportunity to do the kind of intimidation USADA seems to be worried out.

well we still have no word on what Bruyneel has planned. W'll find out ina couple of days at least


as for Arbitration... This could be interesting. If all 3 end up in arbitration (or any combination >1), would they in fact get separate hearings (or whatever you call an arbitration trial) or would they in fact all be included in the same one since they were all charged in the same document originally.

if they were all in the same hearing, evidence against only 1 might add weight to the guilt of another.


edit P.S. as for witness intimidation. With the hype this is generating among main stream media, I think the ability to intimidate any of the witnesses is decreasing. The witnesses if anything would gain more if they are intimidated and they can just come right out and say it. Any witness intimidation at this point could well backfire with massive consequences

 

[WinterRider]

Interesting possibility with the extension. Will USADA delay the cases against Bruyneel and Celaya to coincide with Armstrong?

If not, then the witnesses (Tyler, Floyd, Levi, George, etc.) that likely would testify in those cases would become public before Armstrong's arbitration. Would give him the opportunity to do the kind of intimidation USADA seems to be worried out.

Since the original letter indicated that the 6 cases were joint, I would expect that all of those that choose the hearing route will participate in the same hearing.

They are very explicit about this being a single consolidated case in the original letter, so separate hearings would be quite a surprise in my opinion.

 

[dbrower]

Procedural due process is required of state actors. That's the big deal. USADA has a huge problem with that if they don't expose their witnesses to meaningful cross examination.

USADA has NO problem with this. Their witnesses WILL be available for cross during a hearing -- but not before.

This is what happened in the Landis case(s).

The claim made by Team Armstrong that he will not get to cross-examine witnesses is a LIE.

-dB

 

[Cimacoppi49]

Yeah, you've got it. Only a hearing with witnesses if facts are disputed. You can see why this might become a pandora's box for Lance.

If Lance is able to make an issue of the investigation in federal court (and USADA will fight this tooth and nail), then who knows what comes out...

If Armstrong wins the jurisdictional issue and proceeds in federal court, I would expect USADA to counterclaim for the doping offenses and have that tried in open federal court. That's totally separate from the issue of whether Armstrong could obtain injunctive relief during the pendency of the federal action.

 

[BroDeal]

USADA has NO problem with this. Their witnesses WILL be available for cross during a hearing -- but not before.

This is what happened in the Landis case(s).

The claim made by Team Armstrong that he will not get to cross-examine witnesses is a LIE.

-dB

Time to start up Trust But Verify, version 2.0: This time with less trust and more verify.

 

[Kender]

They are very explicit about this being a single consolidated case in the original letter, so separate hearings would be quite a surprise in my opinion.

that's the way i was leaning also. Hopefully our resident lawyer types can clarify further

 

[Ninety5rpm]

Since the original letter indicated that the 6 cases were joint, I would expect that all of those that choose the hearing route will participate in the same hearing.

They are very explicit about this being a single consolidated case in the original letter, so separate hearings would be quite a surprise in my opinion.

I agree.

If Bruyneel or the other guy (or both) choose a hearing, then USADA will probably tell them they will wait until the end of Lance's extension period (or Lance's decision, whichever comes first) to commence.

 

[Cimacoppi49]

USADA has NO problem with this. Their witnesses WILL be available for cross during a hearing -- but not before.

This is what happened in the Landis case(s).

The claim made by Team Armstrong that he will not get to cross-examine witnesses is a LIE.

-dB

He just won't get to depose them pre-trial as he would in federal or state court.

 

[dbrower]

It was rumoured on Twitter that Dr. Celaya has opted for an arbitration. Can anyone confirm and if so will it be open or closed? When will it begin?

If Celaya's arbitration starts right away and Armstrong's is delayed 30 days won't that give Armstrong's defence a golden opportunity to find out who the witnesses are and then "convince" one or more of them that they were threatened by USADA?

It won't matter much, because plenty of evidence, and cross-examination will have been held, and facts will be discussed, and will come to general light.

The point of this federal case is to prevent their from being any exposure of the actual evidence. Otherwise he'd have his hearing and his CAS appeal, and then try to argue the impropriety of the process after it had been demonstrated. That's what Landis tried, but that suit was settled and withdrawn rather then heard on merits.

-dB

 

[Cimacoppi49]

I agree.

If Bruyneel or the other guy (or both) choose a hearing, then USADA will probably tell them they will wait until the end of Lance's extension period (or Lance's decision, whichever comes first) to commence.

That may not fly unless USADA and WADA agree to forgo suspension of their activities pending a delayed hearing.

 

[dbrower]

Time to start up Trust But Verify, version 2.0: This time with less trust and more verify.

Which has what to do with what I said? On topic, please.

-dB

 

[Cimacoppi49]

It won't matter much, because plenty of evidence, and cross-examination will have been held, and facts will be discussed, and will come to general light.

The point of this federal case is to prevent their from being any exposure of the actual evidence. Otherwise he'd have his hearing and his CAS appeal, and then try to argue the impropriety of the process after it had been demonstrated. That's what Landis tried, but that suit was settled and withdrawn rather then heard on merits.

-dB

Armstrong really can't prevent that in federal court. If his complaint stands, USADA has the right to counterclaim and try the drug issues in open court. Even if a jury finds Armstrong not guilty of doping, his reputation will be in the cesspool. The game is about over for Armstrong. He can delay, but the end is very near.
"Stick a fork in'em and turn'em over. He's done." Lou Reed New York, NY

 

[Cimacoppi49]

WADA just fired a shot over McQuaid's bow.
http://velonews.competitor.com/?p=229112

 

[Kender]

Armstrong really can't prevent that in federal court. If his complaint stands, USADA has the right to counterclaim and try the drug issues in open court. Even if a jury finds Armstrong not guilty of doping, his reputation will be in the cesspool.

no. if a jury finds him not guilty of doping he can fly the victimized marytr route and his rep gets restored once and for all

 

[dbrower]

Armstrong really can't prevent that in federal court. If his complaint stands, USADA has the right to counterclaim and try the drug issues in open court. Even if a jury finds Armstrong not guilty of doping, his reputation will be in the cesspool.

Not sure that's completely true, given Clemens popping up at the All-Star Game.

I do agree if there is any hearing of merits in the Fed case, it would be a foot-bullet.

-dB

 

[Anonymous]

Interesting possibility with the extension. Will USADA delay the cases against Bruyneel and Celaya to coincide with Armstrong?

If not, then the witnesses (Tyler, Floyd, Levi, George, etc.) that likely would testify in those cases would become public before Armstrong's arbitration. Would give him the opportunity to do the kind of intimidation USADA seems to be worried out.

I don't see it.

Lance can't have that information out for the world to see. My guess, if there is any deal struck, it will be for USADA to sanction him until the cows come home, bann him forever... in exchange of the evidence never becoming public.

My guess.

 

[jilbiker]

Maybe a little PR on their part. "We are very confident in our case and procedure, but if Mr. Armstrong feels the need to try to get this process taken to federal court, we will certainly allow him to do this. We want to be as fair and open as we can. We feel certain based on precedent that the complaint filed by Mr Armstrong is baseless, and our answer will provide the detail necessary to completely counter his claims, but we do want the judge to have time to adequately assess all of the mistakes and empty claims in Mr Armstrong's complaint."

I wonder if they want some dirty laundry in public? Sort of do what the Fed did not finish. I wonder if this was all planned with the Fed. They must have already profiled Lance and knew exactly what he will do.

 

[Cimacoppi49]

no. if a jury finds him not guilty of doping he can fly the victimized marytr route and his rep gets restored once and for all

Just like OJ's rep was restored? I think not. Juries can do strange things, but the evidence in this should be compelling.

 

[mewmewmew13]

You are making this very personal.

What does Danielson have to do with the usada case besides him being one of witnesses that usada have? Do you think usada will bring up his ex-wife and money that was given to her during the divorce settlement? If that is true then usada really have gone off the deep end.

You asked me if I really believed that Armstrong was capable of doing a bribe...
Yes I do.
it is not the first time....

 

[Ninety5rpm]

WADA just fired a shot over McQuaid's bow.
http://velonews.competitor.com/?p=229112

Warning him of what?

 

[dbrower]

I don't see it.

Lance can't have that information out for the world to see. My guess, if there is any deal struck, it will be for USADA to sanction him until the cows come home, bann him forever... in exchange of the evidence never becoming public.

My guess.

That doesn't work with Cetalya going to hearing. A publication of the arbitration decision for him will certainly have go over the offered evidence and argument, which will spill the beans.

Armstrong would need to get his settlement, and somehow encourage the Dr. to withdraw his hearing request and take a life ban for the team. What leverage could be used on a European Doctor who is facing a ban to get him to lay down like a dog? Dunno.

-dB

 

[Ninety5rpm]

I don't see it.

Lance can't have that information out for the world to see. My guess, if there is any deal struck, it will be for USADA to sanction him until the cows come home, bann him forever... in exchange of the evidence never becoming public.

My guess.

Now that at least one of the others has asked for a hearing, it seems to me the evidence must come out.

 

[Kender]

Warning him of what?

well for a start the WADA release was in response to media queries not Pat (and the UCI) so he's missed the mark for intent.

however it does in a way tell Pat that yes USADA can ban them for life and if the UCI dont agree they will have to appeal the ban

 

[Anonymous]

That doesn't work with Cetalya going to hearing. A publication of the arbitration decision for him will certainly have go over the offered evidence and argument, which will spill the beans.

Armstrong would need to get his settlement, and somehow encourage the Dr. to withdraw his hearing request and take a life ban for the team. What leverage could be used on a European Doctor who is facing a ban to get him to lay down like a dog? Dunno.

-dB

When would arbitration for Celaya(sp) start? Before the 30 days?

 

[Cal_Joe]

USADA has NO problem with this. Their witnesses WILL be available for cross during a hearing -- but not before.

This is what happened in the Landis case(s).

The claim made by Team Armstrong that he will not get to cross-examine witnesses is a LIE.

-dB

Frankly, I am not sure what rules are to be followed. From the USADA Protocol -

R-29. Evidence by Affidavit and Post-hearing Filing of Documents or
Other Evidence

a. The arbitrator may receive and consider the evidence of witnesses by declaration or affidavit, but shall give it only such weight as the arbitrator deems it entitled to after consideration of any objection made to its admission.