USADA - Armstrong

[Turner29]

Can USADA sanction people form the date of admission of doping?

eg, Vaughter's admits he was on the program at USPS and he finished his last PEDs in October of the year 1999. Can USADA retroactivley ban him from Oct'99 to Oct'01 and nullify all results. A bit like Contador received a retroactive ban (obv Contador competed during that time)?

Riis admitted to doping and received no ban. Would Vaughter's be the same?

I cannot see anyone flipping their evidence at this stage.

I doubt they will go after Vaughters, even though in theory under the tolling concept they might have such ability. One reason being, Vaughters' cover-up is no where near the magnitude of Armstrong's.

 

[Microchip]

He will likely keep that 4th place swimming medal from when he was 12

Just realised that I concluded the word "wins" meant "TDF titles" when in fact there are others. He could keep that one yes, for posterity.

 

[Microchip]

 

[Race Radio]

I would say the highest possible outcome is USADA exposes Wonderboy as the fraud we always knew he was

 

[Turner29]

I would say the highest possible outcome is USADA exposes Wonderboy as the fraud we always knew he was

Many here believe such but I am amazed at the large numbers elsewhere who believe Armstrong is either clean, or the USADA is engaging in a witch-hunt.

 

[Turner29]

Here is superman in 1994.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmR9k8UAohs

STAGE 9 RESULTS: PERIGUEUX-BERGERAC; 64km Individual TT

1 1H15'50" INDURAIN, MIGUEL BANESTO SPA
2 @2'00" ROMINGER, TONY MAPEI-CLAS SWI
3 @4'22" DE LAS CUEVAS, ARMAND CASTORAMA FRA
4 @4'45" MARIE, THIERRY CASTORAMA FRA
5 @5'27" BOARDMAN, CHRIS GAN GBR
6 @5'33" RIIS, BJARNE GEWISS-BALLAN DEN
7 @5'35" DAVY, THOMAS CASTORAMA FRA
8 @5'45" OLANO, ABRAHAM MAPEI-CLAS SPA
9 @6'01" KASPUTIS, ARTURAS CHAZAL LIT
10 @6'04" UGRAMOV, PIOTR GEWISS-BALLAN LAT
11 @6'12" BORTOLAMI, GIANLUCA MAPEI-CLAS ITA
12 @6'16" EMONDS, NICO MAPEI-CLAS BEL
13 @6'23" ARMSTRONG, LANCE MOTOROLA USA

 

[Turner29]

A quick estimate show that if you give Armstrong one minute for improved aerodynamics, he still would need to increase is power 20% to match Indurain.

This video is about as damning as it gets.

 

[thehog]

I can't image how Armstrong would not get a long ban and have much of his "Wins" stripped.

If USADA was going to kick JV out they would have done it years ago. I do not see much similarity with the riders and what Joe did so long bans make no sense.

There is a lot more to this story then just the USADA action. Over the next few months there will be an avalanche of information about not just how Armstrong doped but the very disturbing stuff he did to cover up the truth.

I love it when you talk dirty!

 

[BroDeal]

Here is superman in 1994.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmR9k8UAohs

STAGE 9 RESULTS: PERIGUEUX-BERGERAC; 64km Individual TT

1 1H15'50" INDURAIN, MIGUEL BANESTO SPA
2 @2'00" ROMINGER, TONY MAPEI-CLAS SWI
3 @4'22" DE LAS CUEVAS, ARMAND CASTORAMA FRA
4 @4'45" MARIE, THIERRY CASTORAMA FRA
5 @5'27" BOARDMAN, CHRIS GAN GBR
6 @5'33" RIIS, BJARNE GEWISS-BALLAN DEN
7 @5'35" DAVY, THOMAS CASTORAMA FRA
8 @5'45" OLANO, ABRAHAM MAPEI-CLAS SPA
9 @6'01" KASPUTIS, ARTURAS CHAZAL LIT
10 @6'04" UGRAMOV, PIOTR GEWISS-BALLAN LAT
11 @6'12" BORTOLAMI, GIANLUCA MAPEI-CLAS ITA
12 @6'16" EMONDS, NICO MAPEI-CLAS BEL
13 @6'23" ARMSTRONG, LANCE MOTOROLA USA

That was the time trial that Armstrong said he went as hard as he could. He was not slacking because he knew he could not win.

 

[Weapons of @ss Destruction]

I did find it strange that Ferrari and the others 2 did'nt contest the charges. And I know USADA are treating that as guilt and Travis immediately came out and said as much, but have any of those 3 come out with a statement at all yet? I would have expected some statement from them by now but to say nothing, seems odd.

I'm not surprised at all. For Ferrari his work is off book anyhow, so he doesn't care about charges from a foreign ADA even though he probably has the financial means to lawyer up and put up a few roadblocks. The other docs probably don't have the resources to put forth any useful defense, and will just go off book like Ferrari going forward. Probably not a huge deal for them in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Turner29]

That was the time trial that Armstrong said he went as hard as he could. He was not slacking because he knew he could not win.

In 1993 didn't Armstrong say his goal was to get close to Indurain one minute each year?

 

[thehog]

So USADA file to dismiss. Apparently Armstrong backed the USADA process in another doping case in 2005.

 

[mewmewmew13]

I love it when you talk dirty!

Ooh, I do too
I bought some shares in popcorn futures

 

[dbrower]

So USADA file to dismiss. Apparently Armstrong backed the USADA process in another doping case in 2005.

Do we have a copy of the motion anywhere yet?

-dB

 

[thehog]

Do we have a copy of the motion anywhere yet?

-dB

http://www.statesman.com/news/texas/usada-files-motion-to-dismiss-armstrong-lawsuit-2419353.html

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency has filed a motion asking a judge to dismiss Lance Armstrong's federal lawsuit that seeks to prevent the drug-fighting organization from pursuing doping charges against him.

The motion, filed Thursday in Austin, Texas, cites the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act, which gives USADA jurisdiction over athletes who compete in Olympic sports.

It also includes a 2005 affidavit from USADA CEO Travis Tygart stating that Armstrong took part in USADA's testing program and was under its jurisdiction — the opposite claim Armstrong is making in the current case.

The affidavit helped bolster Armstrong's claims in a lawsuit against SCA Promotions, which refused to pay bonus money to the Tour de France winner because of allegations he used performance-enhancing drugs.

 

[mewmewmew13]

http://www.statesman.com/news/texas/usada-files-motion-to-dismiss-armstrong-lawsuit-2419353.html

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency has filed a motion asking a judge to dismiss Lance Armstrong's federal lawsuit that seeks to prevent the drug-fighting organization from pursuing doping charges against him.

The motion, filed Thursday in Austin, Texas, cites the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act, which gives USADA jurisdiction over athletes who compete in Olympic sports.

It also includes a 2005 affidavit from USADA CEO Travis Tygart stating that Armstrong took part in USADA's testing program and was under its jurisdiction — the opposite claim Armstrong is making in the current case.

The affidavit helped bolster Armstrong's claims in a lawsuit against SCA Promotions, which refused to pay bonus money to the Tour de France winner because of allegations he used performance-enhancing drugs.

Go Travis!!

 

[Turner29]

If I was Judge Sparks, I would be beyond livid at Armstrong and his cronies...

Hopefully, Armstrong's notion will be dismissed tomorrow.

 

[sittingbison]

...The affidavit helped bolster Armstrong's claims in a lawsuit against SCA Promotions, which refused to pay bonus money to the Tour de France winner because of allegations he used performance-enhancing drugs.

hehe hoisted on his own petard %)

 

[thehog]

hehe hoisted on his own petard %)

Apparently the motion states that the 500-600 tests is not correct and requests Armstrong to prove he's had that many tests.

 

[Turner29]

Apparently the motion states that the 500-600 tests is not correct and requests Armstrong to prove he's had that many tests.

These guys mean business and are not being intimated by Armstrong and his minions.

 

[thehog]

Apparently the motion states that the 500-600 tests is not correct and requests Armstrong to prove he's had that many tests.

From WSJ:

USADA questions Lance Armstrong's claim of "500 to 600" passed drug tests in court document filed tonight. Wants evidence from Lance counsel.

In court filing, USADA says "majority" of Armstrong blood and urine samples "unlikely to have been tested for EPO or anabolic steroids"

 

[Cavalier]

Would be outstanding if the motion had dim's chart on it showing a more accurate number.

 

[PotentialPro]

Knight to E5
Is this where the USADA says "check"?

 

[thehog]

Knight to E5
Is this where the USADA says "check"?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444330904577537673199762652.html

In a draft of a letter sent on April 28, 2005, and included in Thursday's court filing, a lawyer for Mr. Armstrong wrote that the U.S. Olympic Committee "has given USADA full authority to execute a comprehensive national anti-doping program encompassing testing, adjudication, education, and research, and to develop programs, policies, and procedures in each of those areas," he said.

USADA said in Thursday's motion that in Mr. Armstrong's current lawsuit against the group, the same attorneys involved in drafting the 2005 affidavit criticize USADA for ignoring "500 to 600" drug tests they say Mr. Armstrong has passed. The attorneys say USADA is instead bringing a case based on witness testimony, known as "nonanalytical" positive testing.

But in the 2005 letter, the attorneys point specifically to USADA's use of nonanalytical positives, USADA says, describing them in the following way: "In other words, an athlete may not test positive, but based on other compelling evidence, there is reason to believe the athlete is guilty of doping."

In editing notes sent via email, Mr. Armstrong's attorneys debated whether to use the sentence about nonanalytical testing in the in the letter.

"I don't know if we include this," an attorney for Mr. Armstrong wrote. "On the one hand, it shows that USADA is serious about doping and looks beyond just tests. On the other hand, it shows that sometimes athletes may pass drug tests but are still guilty of doping. What are your thoughts?"

 

[Turner29]

WSJ provides more detail:

"In a draft of a letter sent on April 28, 2005, and included in Thursday's court filing, a lawyer for Mr. Armstrong wrote that the U.S. Olympic Committee "has given USADA full authority to execute a comprehensive national anti-doping program encompassing testing, adjudication, education, and research, and to develop programs, policies, and procedures in each of those areas," he said.

At the time, Mr. Armstrong's attorneys were fighting an insurance company that had balked at paying millions of dollars in bonuses to Mr. Armstrong because it said he had cheated by doping.

Mr. Armstrong sued the insurance company; attorneys for Mr. Armstrong argued he had never doped and that USADA was the proper forum for the matter, according to an attorney representing the insurance company at the time. They asked Travis Tygart, then general counsel of USADA, to sign an affidavit that certified Mr. Armstrong had never failed a drug test. Mr. Tygart signed a version of that letter.

The letter that Mr. Armstrong's attorneys drafted for Mr. Tygart to sign went into detail about USADA's process, including its arbitration system, which Mr. Armstrong's attorneys now refer to as a "kangaroo court."

"Thus, Armstrong clearly understood he was subject to the USADA Protocol, including its results management and adjudication rules," USADA said in its motion Thursday."