USADA - Armstrong

[MarkvW]

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.

It would be very difficult for Armstrong to argue that the United States Olympic Committee does not have exclusive jurisdiction of "amateur athletes" under the Amateur Sports Act. It would also be very difficult for Armstrong to argue that USADA is not doing antidoping process pursuant to the mandate of the US Olympic Committee.

The reason it is difficult to make those arguments is that those arguments are arguments that Judge Sparks made when he determined that the Amateur Sports Act applied.

 

[DirtyWorks]

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.

Today is the day, however I don't know when some news regarding the deadline will be released to the masses. They've more or less missed an evening news cycle unless the story was embargoed.

Many others certainly know more than I do.

 

[sniper]

the latest CN article provides an index of Armwrong's doping allegations from 1999 to present. I liked this bit regarding the 2005/1999 allegations:

The case was in the public eye until the UCI's "independent" investigator decided Armstrong should be cleared

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/index-of-lance-armstrong-doping-allegations-over-the-years

CN really starting to finally understand where all this is heading.

 

[Darryl Webster]

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

Cheers Bandit...I might even set my alarm clock !

 

[LauraLyn]

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.

Last time: Which jurisdiction issues "remain in play"?

Explain please: "allow the arbitration to proceed by way of default"

True: Arbitration is unfair if there is no due process. (A tautology.) You could also write the same sentence to say: Arbitration is fair if there is due process. (Another tautology.) Did you have a point to make?

everyone + opined = the stuff of dreams

 

[serottasyclist]

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.

Regardless of the merits of the jurisdiction/authority question, the fact that it hasn't been decided yet leaves Armstrong with more options than just "accept sanctions or go to arbitration." He can still refuse to arbitrate and fight sanctions later. Will he win? Probably not. Will he look better before a significant portion of the public than if he lost at arbitration on the merits? I think so.

 

[PosterBill]

Armstrong presser in the making?

 

[LauraLyn]

Regardless of the merits of the jurisdiction/authority question, the fact that it hasn't been decided yet leaves Armstrong with more options than just "accept sanctions or go to arbitration." He can still refuse to arbitrate and fight sanctions later. Will he win? Probably not. Will he look better before a significant portion of the public than if he lost at arbitration on the merits? I think so.

Refuse arbitration and fight where?

There is serious doubt if his kids will want to listen to his appeal. Anyone else you can think of who might?

 

[webvan]

the latest CN article provides an index of Armwrong's doping allegations from 1999 to present. I liked this bit regarding the 2005/1999 allegations:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/index-of-lance-armstrong-doping-allegations-over-the-years

CN really starting to finally understand where all this is heading.

That was funny too

He announced he would submit to an independent testing program using notable anti-doping scientist Dr.*Don*Catlin, a plan that lasted only a few weeks.

...reminds me of "lasted a lunchtime" in the Rutles movie!

 

[BotanyBay]

So, did he choose death or unga-bunga?

 

[GatorGene]

USA time

For those setting alarms, the deadline is 2am Eastern time, or midnite Colorado time.

Cheers,
GatorGene
---;==;<

 

[Benotti69]

So, did he choose death or unga-bunga?

death by unga bunga at the yellow rose

 

[Tubeless]

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

While I'd like to agree, I've found there are still plenty of (uninformed) cyclists willing to believe in Lance as a doer of good and as an all-American sports hero. Just last week I got into a bit of a debate after a mountain-biking race in Pacific NW with some young cyclists, who were not open to seeing the cheating & lying - and kept defending Lance as having never been caught for doping. People don't read stuff like these forums much - and as we've seen some of the press coverage tends to treat Lance with velvet gloves, as he's still not officially guilty of anything.

This is why this case is so significant to Lance's image. He needs to protect the notion his fans have of him as the hero - which is key to his business efforts which in turn are closely aligned with his "charity" work. If there's a decision by an official body (e.g. USDA) that passes a judgement that he's doped & worse, it'll pretty much destroy everything he's built.

Thus it's inconceivable that Lance would admit to anything, or fail to defend his "clean" record. He has to show up and try to resist at every step of the way. My guess is that he'll opt to arbitrate in a closed proceeding, and will use every legal maneuver to try to thwart the process, hoping for a procedural error on behalf of the USDA or the arbitrators - and use that as a way to clean his name at CAS, or to get an excuse to bring the case back to federal court.

 

[GatorGene]

Refuse arbitration and fight where?

There is serious doubt if his kids will want to listen to his appeal. Anyone else you can think of who might?

Court of Public Opinion
---railroaded, witch hunt, no due process, never failed a test, jealous rivals, dirty dopers trying to take the clean down with them, etc, etc, etc. Many will believe.

 

[Benotti69]

While I'd like to agree, I've found there are still plenty of (uninformed) cyclists willing to believe in Lance as a doer of good and as an all-American sports hero. Just last week I got into a bit of a debate after a mountain-biking race in Pacific NW with some young cyclists, who were not open to seeing the cheating & lying - and kept defending Lance as having never been caught for doping. People don't read stuff like these forums much - and as we've seen some of the press coverage tends to treat Lance with velvet gloves, as he's still not officially guilty of anything.

This is why this case is so significant to Lance's image. He needs to protect the notion his fans have of him as the hero - which is key to his business efforts which in turn are closely aligned with his "charity" work. If there's a decision by an official body (e.g. USDA) that passes a judgement that he's doped & worse, it'll pretty much destroy everything he's built.

Thus it's inconceivable that Lance would admit to anything, or fail to defend his "clean" record. He has to show up and try to resist at every step of the way. My guess is that he'll opt to arbitrate in a closed proceeding, and will use every legal maneuver to try to thwart the process, hoping for a procedural error on behalf of the USDA or the arbitrators - and use that as a way to clean his name at CAS.

That is way to risky for Armstrong, because if USADA does everything right and there is no reason they wont, Armstrong is screwed. He wont take that risk.

 

[serottasyclist]

Refuse arbitration and fight where?

There is serious doubt if his kids will want to listen to his appeal. Anyone else you can think of who might?

I've already laid out examples, but let me give a more generic and way overly simplistic example that I'm sure someone will rip apart:

Lets say Angie was born in CA and has lived her entire life in CA. Betty files a lawsuit against Angie in AZ state court, saying that Angie stole $25,000 from her. Angie is served process and told that there is a hearing in the AZ state court. Angie says "this is stupid, I've never been to AZ. I'm not going to show up for this". The AZ state court enters judgement for Betty.

Betty then tries to get a CA court to enforce the judgement against Angie. Angie says "look, that AZ court may have entered a judgment against me for $25,000, but look at this GPS tracking chip that his been planted in me since birth -- I've never set foot in the state of AZ. There is noway that court had jurisdiction over me, so that judgement has no meaning." The CA court (and any court) would agree and refuse to enforce the judgement of the AZ state court b/c that court never had jurisdiction over Angie.

 

[LauraLyn]

Court of Public Opinion
---railroaded, witch hunt, no due process, never failed a test, jealous rivals, dirty dopers trying to take the clean down with them, etc, etc, etc. Many will believe.

Nopes.

It was good while it lasted. Lot's of fun. That is now finished.

 

[D-Queued]

Wow....this is so far out on the fringe that even I'm stunned. Applicability of U.S. labor laws to this USADA vs. Armstrong anti-doping case?

I just don't see it. No way. Armstrong was only an employee of the teams he raced for and whose jerseys he wore when he raced. No team has taken any action against him, nor could they because he's retired and no longer works for those teams. Oh, and none of the activity alleged in the USADA case even occurred in the U.S.

U.S. Labor Laws?

I don't think so.

Applicability of US labor law may be a stretch. Then again, it is an interesting suggestion.

Now, as for your assertions

1. Lance only an employee

Sorry, but he testified himself in his SCA deposition that he was an owner and officer of Tailwind Sports

2. No teams taken action against him

Sorry, you did follow that Federal prosecutorswere investigating him for actions at USPS didn't you?

3. Nor could they

Really?

Former employers can't go after former employees for fraud?

All you have to do when you steal from the company is quit and you are immune?

Didn't you claim to have a legal background?

4. None of the alleged activity took place in the US

Really *2?

USPS isn't in the US? How about Solvang? Where is that?

Lance didn't evade a doping test in Austin?

Ferrari never visited Austin?

Not like we don't have sworn depositions from the SCA case on all of that and more.

Where does Hemassist come from?

Lance never trained (!) in the US?

And you know about all of the alleged activity because.... Because?

Because you are on Lance's legal team?

Perhaps you could enlighten all of us then, about exactly what the charging document and all of the witness testimony is about.

Dave.

 

[Square-pedaller]

Lets say Angie was born in CA and has lived her entire life in CA. Betty files a lawsuit against Angie in AZ state court, saying that Angie stole $25,000 from her. Angie is served process and told that there is a hearing in the AZ state court. Angie says "this is stupid, I've never been to AZ. I'm not going to show up for this". The AZ state court enters judgement for Betty.

Betty then tries to get a CA court to enforce the judgement against Angie. Angie says "look, that AZ court may have entered a judgment against me for $25,000, but look at this GPS tracking chip that his been planted in me since birth -- I've never set foot in the state of AZ. There is noway that court had jurisdiction over me, so that judgement has no meaning." The CA court (and any court) would agree and refuse to enforce the judgement of the AZ state court b/c that court never had jurisdiction over Angie.

Maybe I don't understand enough about the US legal system, but are you trying to say that Armstrong has a chip implanted that shows he's never been to Austin or been a professional cyclist?

 

[the big ring]

Maybe I don't understand enough about the US legal system, but are you trying to say that Armstrong has a chip implanted that shows he's never been to Austin or been a professional cyclist?

It's on his shoulder.

I don't understand the constant "guess what's he's going to do" stuff. Wait 10 hours and you'll know for sure!

 

[Briant_Gumble]

Court of Public Opinion
---railroaded, witch hunt, no due process, never failed a test, jealous rivals, dirty dopers trying to take the clean down with them, etc, etc, etc. Many will believe.

I don't want to turn this thread into a list of those who think Armstrong's public image will be able to recover from this and those who don't but I strongly disagree that his public image will be able to recover from this.

The only reason this isn't making the front page of ESPN and major sports journalistic sites in the UK (where I'm from) is because they are sitting on the fence waiting to see how this pans out.

The man's indiscretions don't merely stop at using doping in sports there's plenty of stories out there of him being a jerk, engaging in criminal activity, dumping his wife, dumping sheryl crow for wanting kids etc.

Once it becomes "cool" to dislike Armstrong thousands of sportswriters worldwide are going to be commissioned to write an editorial crucifying him and they won't have to dig deep to get some juicy information. Tiger Woods was once revered not so much now, one deed has changed the public opinion of many soccer players and I'm sure it has done the same for many baseball players in the US.

 

[Square-pedaller]

It's on his shoulder.

I don't understand the constant "guess what's he's going to do" stuff. Wait 10 hours and you'll know for sure!

Yes, it's time I went to bed.

 

[Berzin]

For those setting alarms, the deadline is 2am Eastern time, or midnite Colorado time.

Guess I'll tune in at 2:05 a.m. to see what exactly transpired.

My guess is the lawyers are having gumbo tonight in New Orleans...

 

[LauraLyn]

Maybe I don't understand enough about . . . .

Same. Jurisdiction, labor law, due process, court of public opinion, 500, everyone hates me, 5th Circuit Court, what if . . . . Lot's to talk about as the clock ticks down.

Lance has two options:

1. Arbitration (still the most likely, even at this hour on the South Pole)
2. A confession (according to the terms of the USADA) - could be interesting

And there is still the one we were all looking at and didn't see: blindsided.

 

[Benotti69]

I've already laid out examples, but let me give a more generic and way overly simplistic example that I'm sure someone will rip apart:

Lets say Angie was born in CA and has lived her entire life in CA. Betty files a lawsuit against Angie in AZ state court, saying that Angie stole $25,000 from her. Angie is served process and told that there is a hearing in the AZ state court. Angie says "this is stupid, I've never been to AZ. I'm not going to show up for this". The AZ state court enters judgement for Betty.

Betty then tries to get a CA court to enforce the judgement against Angie. Angie says "look, that AZ court may have entered a judgment against me for $25,000, but look at this GPS tracking chip that his been planted in me since birth -- I've never set foot in the state of AZ. There is noway that court had jurisdiction over me, so that judgement has no meaning." The CA court (and any court) would agree and refuse to enforce the judgement of the AZ state court b/c that court never had jurisdiction over Angie.

Armstrong set foot in the state USADA plenty of times