• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Zabriskie and Van de Velde already sang

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 13, 2010
185
0
0
Visit site
SpartacusRox said:
You are right, I do have a motive. A motive to bring a little balance to the forum. That does not mean my opinions are right, only time will tell that.

Balance = misquoting, misrepresenting and failing to correct the record? That's what Fox news mean by it too...
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
SpartacusRox said:
.....This particular case is being investigated with the rigor it is because of the publicity it generates as much as anything.

How do you know this? Have you seen exactly what Novitsky is investigating? It appears it is Armstrong, but it actually maybe some else like a big network of PED pushing????, which stretches into other sports, but they are very happy to keep the media chasing the armstrong aspect of it while they go after their real catch......

We are now being told that Michael Ball has been investigated since last year, so we are not aware, on here anyway, of what is Novitsky's real targets.
 

SpartacusRox

BANNED
May 6, 2010
711
0
0
Visit site
python said:
spartacusrox, i am going to make it brief and impersonal (unlike the majority of your posts) - watch the trend of the investigation and nothing else if you (or anyone else) assume 'we don't know the true details or the extent of the collaboration' (which of course is true).

plain fact - an increasing number of reputable papers and sources report that the investigation is widening, and progressing through necessary legal phases.

this is exactly the opposite of what an apologist/fan/legaladviser for armsrong side would wish.

check this sequence please:

FDA investigation (novizky) --> added a prosecutor muscle(miller) --> Interpol getting involved --> first grand jury subpoenas issued ...........(indictment next ?)

and for your information, as i posted earlier, if you get indicted in central california federal district, your chance of being found guilty is about 90%.

Thank you Python. I am not sure which of my posts, other than the tongue in cheek ones, that would be deemed personal. Unless of course you feel they offend your own personal sensibilities.

Just being impersonal in return...

I don't care at all how wide the investigation gets. In fact I would be happy to see a wide investigation, one that is not myopically focussed on one person. Of course that will not happen as the federal powers of the investigators are limited to the US jurisdiction.

I will comment on your investigation chain though. The sequence that you present is pretty standard fare for this type of investigation. Of course you need a prosecutor if there is any potential that the investigation may lead to a prosecution. Interpol are just the standard vehicle that law enforcement agencies use to facilitate the transfer of information across varying international jurisdictions. Such information however is still subject to the laws of the particular country with regards to its release. It is not merely a case of US investigators calling interpol in France for information and them saying; "sure we will pop it in the mail tomorrow". Finally with the amount of money going into this investigation it would be pure political expediency to bring the matter before a Grand Jury. As I have already stated in another post, this is purely a one sided hearing to determine if there is a prima facie case to answer.

I cannot comment on your statement regarding the level of success other than to say that I would be surprised if it was that high in cases such as this. In general criminal matters it is usually high because they usually have a smoking gun or good forensic evidence. I do not know if that is the case here. Even if there is forensic evidence, there will be much legal argument around whether or not it is admissible or relevant.
 

SpartacusRox

BANNED
May 6, 2010
711
0
0
Visit site
Benotti69 said:
How do you know this? Have you seen exactly what Novitsky is investigating? It appears it is Armstrong, but it actually maybe some else like a big network of PED pushing????, which stretches into other sports, but they are very happy to keep the media chasing the armstrong aspect of it while they go after their real catch......

We are now being told that Michael Ball has been investigated since last year, so we are not aware, on here anyway, of what is Novitsky's real targets.

Thats true, happy to concede that you make a good point there.
 

SpartacusRox

BANNED
May 6, 2010
711
0
0
Visit site
Realist said:
Balance = misquoting, misrepresenting and failing to correct the record? That's what Fox news mean by it too...

I'm sure that you know what you are referring to, I sure don't.

My original response was to the guy who started the thread, you seem to have inserted yourself into it along the way and I may have got you confused with him. I apologise if I attributed his comments to you.
 

editedbymod

BANNED
Jul 11, 2010
112
0
0
Visit site
python said:
and for your information, as i posted earlier, if you get indicted in central california federal district, your chance of being found guilty is about 90%.

Apparently if you do good things for lots of people that figure drops to around 17%.
 
Jul 13, 2010
185
0
0
Visit site
SpartacusRox said:
I'm sure that you know what you are referring to, I sure don't.

My original response was to the guy who started the thread, you seem to have inserted yourself into it along the way and I may have got you confused with him. I apologise if I attributed his comments to you.

I didn't 'insert myself in it'. You quoted me and misrepresented what I said. Thanks for the apology though, appreciated.
 
Jul 11, 2010
50
0
0
Visit site
SpartacusRox said:
Lol great reply to a well made point:rolleyes:

You guys are such dreamers if you think this is going to do anything except suck up a lot of taxpayer money for no outcome and to the general public make Armstrong look like the victim. It's going to be a fun filled few months or more coming up.

Sad but true.
 
Ferminal said:
We know that Jan Ullrich was given a six month ban for a positive to Ecstasy in 2002.

Jan Ullrich really got railroaded there. Why are recreational drugs on the banned substance list at all? They don't increase performance.

It seems like the UCI is trying to legislate the morality and behavior of the athletes in a sport filled with greedy and corrupt promoters and officials. :rolleyes:
 
Aug 10, 2009
213
0
0
Visit site
SlantParallelogram said:
Jan Ullrich really got railroaded there. Why are recreational drugs on the banned substance list at all? They don't increase performance.

I think there is amphetemine in ecstasy? That's the problem with that drug and tests.

I heard back around 2000 in the height of the EPO era that ecstasy was actually used quite a bit in Europe by the pros. Not so much because it 'did' anything, more for its mood altering benefits.

You know getting hopped up on EPO still doesn't motivate you to train hard. But if you drop some ecstasy on those chilly rainy European spring days you just felt marvelously happy while you tapped out your 7hr epo fueled jaunt through the countryside. :)
 
AT that time, Ecstasy was on the forbidden list for out-of-competition testing. Shortly thereafter it was removed from that list.

Same for Tom Boonen and his positive cocaine tests. Since they were detected in out-of-competition controls, he faced no official punishment.

I assume but have not checked, that both are still forbidden for in-competition usage.

Susan
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
Visit site
Fourier said:
I never thought this investigation was for real but now it looks like it has some traction. The funny thing is that although I've always hoped LA and JB get caught, it feels kind of weird. All fans and competitors got screwed all this time, now maybe we will have confirmation of that. Nobody really wins in this.
"have you ever felt you've been cheated..."

Not true, it is about vindication by LeMond and wife.
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
Visit site
shouldawouldacoulda said:
I think there is amphetemine in ecstasy? That's the problem with that drug and tests.

I heard back around 2000 in the height of the EPO era that ecstasy was actually used quite a bit in Europe by the pros. Not so much because it 'did' anything, more for its mood altering benefits.

You know getting hopped up on EPO still doesn't motivate you to train hard. But if you drop some ecstasy on those chilly rainy European spring days you just felt marvelously happy while you tapped out your 7hr epo fueled jaunt through the countryside. :)

seriously if a rider tried riding on x he or she would probably run head on into a lorrie. Out of love for the truck!
 
Jul 13, 2010
185
0
0
Visit site
flicker said:
seriously if a rider tried riding on x he or she would probably run head on into a lorrie. Out of love for the truck!

Ha... well put. I have heard hearsay about use of recreational drugs by professional cyclists and don't doubt some do - they are people, after all. But using ecstasy in training is one of the dumber rumors anyone ever tried to start.