USADA - Armstrong

[B_Ugli]

On these issues judge Sparks clearly doesn't know the UCI or about cycling in general. Secondly USADA arbitration, as far as I understand, isn't beholden to the same standard of "burden of proof" as would be maintained in a civil case. Thirdly, in withholding evidence from Armstrong and his legal team before receiving a request for a public hearing, USADA is merely following a procedural outlet at its disposal provided within its own constitution to which Armstrong consented to abide by as a USAC pro license holder.

Judge Sparks should have taken this into consideration and realize that once Armstrong and his legal team were to request a hearing, they would be given full access to all the evidence being used by USADA against the Texan and consequently be able to build their defense around it with all the guarantees of due process as in any other legal hearing. Besides, USADA has always maintained its position that if it has decided not to lay down all its the cards on the table initially and withhold evidence from Armstrong and his lawyers until due time, it is because of the Texan's ferocious reputation to intimidate, both personally and legally, any compromising witnesses against him and his cycling legacy.

It thus seems as if judge Sparks is deliberately trying to protect himself from a certain public (and probably certain political) scrutiny over his siding with USADA in throwing out the Armstrong crew's motion to check the anti-doping governing body's action against him. For only an idiot would believe that USADA, given the delicate and sensitive matter (both public and political) of the Armstrong case, would brazenly attempt to deny the defendant's right to due process. A sort of washing his hands of all responsibility and bloodshed, in a manner of speaking, in the style of Pontius Pilate; though in this case the accused is no messiah.

At any rate, as for as the "political end" of the case goes: in regards to the means with which USADA gathered its testimony in probably cutting deals with witnesses to amass damning accounts in exchange for leniency - well that's just part of the game in mafia cases like this when dealing with the big fish. For cycling, like all pro sport - the IOC, World Cup Soccer, the NFL, the NBA, the NBL - is a mafia, with all the hierarchical corruption, the circulation of colossal sums of money, commercial interests, hypocrisy and omertà to boot; and to go after the big bosses one must thus resort to certain tactics. In addition, however, wasn't it Lance all along who has tried to "politicize" everything: first during his career by amassing a propaganda campaign to bolster his image (also through his Cancer Foundation) and also to smear, bully and intimidate, personally and legally, any and all colleagues who stated things contrary to the script? Wasn't it the Texan who all along worked through the political outlets of the UCI with bribery and his commercial image status to gain effective impunity for his sporting crimes within the governing body of cycling – a unique and perverse status that none of his other colleagues enjoyed. And wasn't it he, buddy of George Bush, who had worked outlets within the republican party to first get the federal case against him dropped and then to call into question and demonize USADA in his currant legal odyssey? So if there is anybody politicizing the case it is the Texan himself, which judge Sparks should well know but neglected to say.

Lastly as far as the IOC is concerned, let's just leave that alone Judge Sparks now shall we. As if star and cash cow olympian's like Bolt would ever be found positive for doping. At any rate the IOC thinks only of its pocketbook, while the USADA is only proceeding with its job: namely to fight doping in sport and to punish dopers.

Great post. Sometimes it is more important what Judges dont say (or allude to) rather than what they say. Sparks isnt stupid and he will know full well the reasons why USADA isnt giving LA an easy ride. What he is basically saying to USADA is that there will come a point where they will need to be seen to play fair and square to avoid the investigation being perceived as a witch hunt.

If I were USADA I would make a statement to the effect that once evidence is disclosed to the defendants each and every incident of witness intimidation, and attempts to circumvent the process will be documented, reported and brought to the attention of the court & public. All they need to do is keep it factual and free from emotion, spin and PR.

I think the key here is fairness and openess. The more reasonable and open USADA are after disclosure of evidence any dirty tricks campaign against them will be seen as exactly that!

 

[Anonymous]

If they strip Levi of his victories, will they also strip us of the horrible memories of watching him wheelsuck his way to them?

What has been seen can never be unseen.

 

[python]

here’s how i see the game moving on from here.

1. armstrong has to appeal. a letter begging usada for another extension is already in the mail.

why ? b/c of the 3 bad options (appeal, accept arbitration, allow deadline to pass) this is the least bad. he knows the appeal will be rejected, but it will allow him buying more time and likely to reset usada dead line by another month or so.

what will he do with that time ?

i believe he will do 2 things. one, he will continue pushing the uci to either sue usada in swiss courts or make them file a case with cas (more likely) requesting arbitration over uci's jurisdiction. two, he will attempt to separate his case from the usada hearings of bruyneel and marti - to allow the evidence get public and thus give himself more time to work on how to discredit/intimidate witnesses hoping they reverse...

2. should Armstrong lose the federal appeal, which he must, he will try avoiding the usada AAA hearing and negotiate for taking his case directly to cas.

should this scheme work as i think it may, the actual armstrong doping hearing wont start until 2013 b/c cas has it’s own procedural timetable which, as we know from contador’s case, can be stretched and stretched….

then of course, usada can send signals that there will be no another extension come the 23 august. this will force armstrong to accept arbitration and attempted option 2 - cas hearing negotiations.

either way, we are looking into 2013 for a final conclusion.

 

[the big ring]

i believe he will do 2 things. one, he will continue pushing the uci to either sue usada in swiss courts or make them file a case with cas (more likely) requesting arbitration over uci's jurisdiction.

Given the recent UCI statement saying they accept USADA jurisdiction, to turn around and take USADA to CAS would be less a backpedal and more a backflip on the part of the UCI.

Don't see it happening - that'd be too ridiculous even for them, surely?

While the UCI was opposed to USADA’s arbitration, it now says it accepts Sparks’ contention that the arbitration panel is neutral. “Now if the case will be decided in an independent arbitration, that is the best thing…once again it was what we had proposed from the beginning.

“What we disagreed based, once again on what we knew at that time, was the jurisdiction of USADA on this matter because we were and are convinced that the international federation has roles to play, that they have to defend their own autonomy in this situation.”

“As is our right, we wanted just defend our interpretation of the rules and to defend the role of the international federation. We accept the decision of the judge.”

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...-to-defend-Lance-Armstrong.aspx#ixzz24BFUyhYW

 

[python]

Given the recent UCI statement saying they accept USADA jurisdiction, to turn around and take USADA to CAS would be less a backpedal and more a backflip on the part of the UCI.

Don't see it happening - that'd be too ridiculous even for them, surely?

i have completely gave up on taking ANYTHING uci says seriously. they've discredited themselves so many times it is now beyond common sense...

that statement still leaves room for a flip flop because at no time they gave up their position on jurisdiction over the armstrong case.

but, armstrong pushing the uci to do something, does not mean it will happen automatically as he wants...i can even see the uci flipping into another salto and joining the usada IF (big if) usada agrees to keep the uci corruption and cover-up evidence off the table.

unlikely the usada will take the bait, but stranger things happened.

 

[thehog]

here’s how i see the game moving on from here.

1. armstrong has to appeal. a letter begging usada for another extension is already in the mail.

why ? b/c of the 3 bad options (appeal, accept arbitration, allow deadline to pass) this is the least bad. he knows the appeal will be rejected, but it will allow him buying more time and likely to reset usada dead line by another month or so.

what will he do with that time ?

i believe he will do 2 things. one, he will continue pushing the uci to either sue usada in swiss courts or make them file a case with cas (more likely) requesting arbitration over uci's jurisdiction. two, he will attempt to separate his case from the usada hearings of bruyneel and marti - to allow the evidence get public and thus give himself more time to work on how to discredit/intimidate witnesses hoping they reverse...

2. should Armstrong lose the federal appeal, which he must, he will try avoiding the usada AAA hearing and negotiate for taking his case directly to cas.

should this scheme work as i think it may, the actual armstrong doping hearing wont start until 2013 b/c cas has it’s own procedural timetable which, as we know from contador’s case, can be stretched and stretched….

then of course, usada can send signals that there will be no another extension come the 23 august. this will force armstrong to accept arbitration and attempted option 2 - cas hearing negotiations.

either way, we are looking into 2013 for a final conclusion.

You forgot; choose to arbitrate and not show. Send a proxy. F0ck it. Call Sheryl Crow as a witnesses. Make it a celeb trial. Gets fans holding a vigil out the front. Get a song written about your freedom. "All we are saying....". Just attempt to derail the entire proceedings.

 

[D-Queued]

<Snipped an incredibly well written post>

... And wasn't it he, buddy of George Bush...

Feel bad snipping the post. But, this line detracted from an otherwise awesome summary.

Upon further review, apparently the ex isn't as fond on Lance as we have been led to believe (by Lance, of course).

Where I, myself, might have suggested this relationship leveraging in the past, apparently they are not close whatsoever and 'W' may have demonstrated good judgement and character insight.

Dave.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

here’s how i see the game moving on from here.

1. armstrong has to appeal. a letter begging usada for another extension is already in the mail.

why ? b/c of the 3 bad options (appeal, accept arbitration, allow deadline to pass) this is the least bad. he knows the appeal will be rejected, but it will allow him buying more time and likely to reset usada dead line by another month or so.

what will he do with that time ?

i believe he will do 2 things. one, he will continue pushing the uci to either sue usada in swiss courts or make them file a case with cas (more likely) requesting arbitration over uci's jurisdiction. two, he will attempt to separate his case from the usada hearings of bruyneel and marti - to allow the evidence get public and thus give himself more time to work on how to discredit/intimidate witnesses hoping they reverse...

2. should Armstrong lose the federal appeal, which he must, he will try avoiding the usada AAA hearing and negotiate for taking his case directly to cas.

should this scheme work as i think it may, the actual armstrong doping hearing wont start until 2013 b/c cas has it’s own procedural timetable which, as we know from contador’s case, can be stretched and stretched….

then of course, usada can send signals that there will be no another extension come the 23 august. this will force armstrong to accept arbitration and attempted option 2 - cas hearing negotiations.

either way, we are looking into 2013 for a final conclusion.

As I said earlier in the thread this is the ultimate GT of doping cases and yesterday's stage results would have a big bearing on the overall.

I agree that something will come down before the 23rd, but it's akin to sending some team mates up the road, it will be obvious and ultimately fail.
While I like your thoughts on going directly to CAS, I think he will settle for arbitration.
Firstly to agree to the CAS route on offer by USADA it would have to be public, so I think LA would rather a closed hearing and retain the option of appealing.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You forgot; choose to arbitrate and not show. Send a proxy. F0ck it. Call Sheryl Crow as a witnesses. Make it a celeb trial. Gets fans holding a vigil out the front. Get a song written about your freedom. "All we are saying....". Just attempt to derail the entire proceedings.

He should go to his nearest Ecuadorean embassy - maybe even get a backdated birthcert and claim that he is not American.

 

[hrotha]

Looking at the Cyclingnews Facebook comments I'm not optimistic about Lance not surviving the public opinion battle. Even with all the info that's already out there for everyone to see, lots of people are still repeating the usual drivel - never tested positive, waste of taxpayers money, no evidence, witch hunt, it's in the past, etc.

 

[ToreBear]

here’s how i see the game moving on from here.

1. armstrong has to appeal. a letter begging usada for another extension is already in the mail.

why ? b/c of the 3 bad options (appeal, accept arbitration, allow deadline to pass) this is the least bad. he knows the appeal will be rejected, but it will allow him buying more time and likely to reset usada dead line by another month or so.

what will he do with that time ?

i believe he will do 2 things. one, he will continue pushing the uci to either sue usada in swiss courts or make them file a case with cas (more likely) requesting arbitration over uci's jurisdiction. two, he will attempt to separate his case from the usada hearings of bruyneel and marti - to allow the evidence get public and thus give himself more time to work on how to discredit/intimidate witnesses hoping they reverse...

2. should Armstrong lose the federal appeal, which he must, he will try avoiding the usada AAA hearing and negotiate for taking his case directly to cas.

should this scheme work as i think it may, the actual armstrong doping hearing wont start until 2013 b/c cas has it’s own procedural timetable which, as we know from contador’s case, can be stretched and stretched….

then of course, usada can send signals that there will be no another extension come the 23 august. this will force armstrong to accept arbitration and attempted option 2 - cas hearing negotiations.

either way, we are looking into 2013 for a final conclusion.

Does USADA have anything to loose by not allowing any of his schemes to delay the process?

As far as I see it they have been very accommodating so far. That should be enough. They can't bend over backwards to accommodate him even more than they already have. More accommodation now and one could argue that Mr. Armstrong is being given special treatment because he is rich and famous. That would reflect poorly on USADA IMHO.

 

[ToreBear]

Looking at the Cyclingnews Facebook comments I'm not optimistic about Lance not surviving the public opinion battle. Even with all the info that's already out there for everyone to see, lots of people are still repeating the usual drivel - never tested positive, waste of taxpayers money, no evidence, witch hunt, it's in the past, etc.

People are like that. Once we believe something, it's very hard to change our minds. Some people are able to reasess their views more easily than others. This modus of operandi has both pros and cons in our daily lives.

 

[RichWalk]

People are like that. Once we believe something, it's very hard to change our minds. Some people are able to reasess their views more easily than others. This modus of operandi has both pros and cons in our daily lives.

True, the 'speeding in a car' analogy is one of the best ways to get folk to think about it differently as its damn near universal to those who drive

 

[BotanyBay]

here’s how i see the game moving on from here.

1. armstrong has to appeal. a letter begging usada for another extension is already in the mail.

why ? b/c of the 3 bad options (appeal, accept arbitration, allow deadline to pass) this is the least bad. he knows the appeal will be rejected, but it will allow him buying more time and likely to reset usada dead line by another month or so.
.

Of course he will appeal. That means there is more time for his PIs to find old photos of Travis dressed in drag, etc. this is going to be a dirty game of pool.

 

[python]

As I said earlier in the thread this is the ultimate GT of doping cases and yesterday's stage results would have a big bearing on the overall.

I agree that something will come down before the 23rd, but it's akin to sending some team mates up the road, it will be obvious and ultimately fail.
While I like your thoughts on going directly to CAS, I think he will settle for arbitration.
Firstly to agree to the CAS route on offer by USADA it would have to be public, so I think LA would rather a closed hearing and retain the option of appealing.

i agree, that is the likeliest eventual outcome - the north american arbitration before cas ever would get involved...i was only projecting his likeliest moves if i was in armstrong shoes.

as i noted earlier, in my judgement, even though the usada left the door open for one single final hearing moved to cas, their true goal is to FORCE the AAA hearing first. the reasons are probably worth another thread, but in summary, it would effectively blunt armstrong's stalling tactic (play for time) and having more control over the flow of the proceedings.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Looking at the Cyclingnews Facebook comments I'm not optimistic about Lance not surviving the public opinion battle. Even with all the info that's already out there for everyone to see, lots of people are still repeating the usual drivel - never tested positive, waste of taxpayers money, no evidence, witch hunt, it's in the past, etc.

I don't do Facebook - but how many opinions clearly state that LA did not, or could never dope? Waste of taxpayers money, witch hunt etc are tacit admissions that he is guilty.

He will always have a few fanatical supporters - we saw that with the Penn State case, and that makes LA case seem irrelevant and trivial - however in the greater general publics view, he is a doper and a fraud.

 

[MarkvW]

Of course he will appeal. That means there is more time for his PIs to find old photos of Travis dressed in drag, etc. this is going to be a dirty game of pool.

You'll have to explain how an appeal will buy Armstrong more time.

 

[krebs303]

Looking at the Cyclingnews Facebook comments I'm not optimistic about Lance not surviving the public opinion battle. Even with all the info that's already out there for everyone to see, lots of people are still repeating the usual drivel - never tested positive, waste of taxpayers money, no evidence, witch hunt, it's in the past, etc.

 

[ToreBear]

That is the perfect way to put it!

 

[Race Radio]

Looking at the Cyclingnews Facebook comments I'm not optimistic about Lance not surviving the public opinion battle. Even with all the info that's already out there for everyone to see, lots of people are still repeating the usual drivel - never tested positive, waste of taxpayers money, no evidence, witch hunt, it's in the past, etc.

He has already lost the. Q Scores says he has a 10% favorable rating. The Facebook comments are an organized effort that does not reflect the real opinion of the populace

 

[uspostal]

How many people think that Judge Sparks has seen the last of this matter on his desk ??

In another note, Sparks writes, "Among the Court's concerns is the fact that USADA has targeted Armstrong for prosecution many years after his alleged doping violations occurred, and intends to consolidate his case with those of several other alleged offenders, including - incredibly - several over whom USA Cycling and USOC apparently have no authority whatsoever. Further, if Armstrong's allegations are true, and USADA is promising lesser sanctions against other allegedly offending riders in exchange for their testimony against Armstrong

With this paragraph he's almost asking to see this case after the arbitration if the USADA uses any cyclists in its case that are or have riden after giving testimony.

 

[Kretch]

Well, she's a CN writer, and member of this forum (though not very active). Try asking her, politely.

I'm not trying to throw her under the bus (despite what some people think, I do no work here), but considering the importance of the situation, I think you bring up a valid question.

This is just flat out bad journalism and of the type that the LA PR spin machine has used to great effect over the years to maintain the myth. She needs to be called out.

 

[MarkvW]

How many people think that Judge Sparks has seen the last of this matter on his desk ??

In another note, Sparks writes, "Among the Court's concerns is the fact that USADA has targeted Armstrong for prosecution many years after his alleged doping violations occurred, and intends to consolidate his case with those of several other alleged offenders, including - incredibly - several over whom USA Cycling and USOC apparently have no authority whatsoever. Further, if Armstrong's allegations are true, and USADA is promising lesser sanctions against other allegedly offending riders in exchange for their testimony against Armstrong

With this paragraph he's almost asking to see this case after the arbitration if the USADA uses any cyclists in its case that are or have riden after giving testimony.

No chance of a return to Sparks' courtroom at least until after the arbitration and the CAS review are over.

 

[Benotti69]

How many people think that Judge Sparks has seen the last of this matter on his desk ??

In another note, Sparks writes, "Among the Court's concerns is the fact that USADA has targeted Armstrong for prosecution many years after his alleged doping violations occurred, and intends to consolidate his case with those of several other alleged offenders, including - incredibly - several over whom USA Cycling and USOC apparently have no authority whatsoever. Further, if Armstrong's allegations are true, and USADA is promising lesser sanctions against other allegedly offending riders in exchange for their testimony against Armstrong

With this paragraph he's almost asking to see this case after the arbitration if the USADA uses any cyclists in its case that are or have riden after giving testimony.

I wouldn't get worked up about it. Many people are caught years after their crimes. If Sparks was truly interested in why it took so long he would have researched it and discovered a serious trail of corruption leading to the UCI and ASO.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

This is just flat out bad journalism and of the type that the LA PR spin machine has used to great effect over the years to maintain the myth. She needs to be called out.

Agreed, particularly when the headline would indicate a ruling quite opposite of the one issued. Shame on them for letting that slide.