Lance Armstrong vs. USADA
Discussion
As stated previously...doping, drugs and sport are one thing and essentially fairly minor.
Perjury and fraud however, rank much higher in the minds of those in charge of the justice systems around the world, esp in America. There will be some very ambitious DA's in American now scrambling to see if and who can be the first to put a perjury or fraud charge against Armstrong and get him in court. Its a "make a career" case.
What will be interesting is if somebody takes a look at the possibility of a mass action tort case against Armstrong. You have a cpl of different angles...the cycling world, those allegedly persecuted by Armstrong, fellow doping cyclists/team mates forced into it, those who did not dope and were sinned against, etc and all those who have donated to Livestrong. IF and I stress IF there any evidence of fraud around that, then in addition to the criminal Fed level fraud case, just watch a civil action tort case spring up.
The sporting aspect of this is just a sideshow, but then it always was. This has never been about the sport.
Perjury and fraud however, rank much higher in the minds of those in charge of the justice systems around the world, esp in America. There will be some very ambitious DA's in American now scrambling to see if and who can be the first to put a perjury or fraud charge against Armstrong and get him in court. Its a "make a career" case.
What will be interesting is if somebody takes a look at the possibility of a mass action tort case against Armstrong. You have a cpl of different angles...the cycling world, those allegedly persecuted by Armstrong, fellow doping cyclists/team mates forced into it, those who did not dope and were sinned against, etc and all those who have donated to Livestrong. IF and I stress IF there any evidence of fraud around that, then in addition to the criminal Fed level fraud case, just watch a civil action tort case spring up.
The sporting aspect of this is just a sideshow, but then it always was. This has never been about the sport.
Cheib said:
^^^^ Very well put.
There will also be all sorts of people trying to disassociate themselves from Armstrong.....as they said on the programme last night. He's a guy that had the US President's number in his mobile phone. Lots of people would like this to go away quietly.
The thing is, if it doesn't quietly go away, they will be turning on him, wanting the public to remember where they stood at the end of it all.There will also be all sorts of people trying to disassociate themselves from Armstrong.....as they said on the programme last night. He's a guy that had the US President's number in his mobile phone. Lots of people would like this to go away quietly.
el stovey said:
I wonder if LA actually believes he's done anything wrong. He sounds like a bit of a narcissist. I bet he could easily pass a lie detector test regardless of if he doped or not.
I would go so far as to say he's got a borderline personality, if not an outright psychopath/sociopath. There must be a correct clinical term; in the meantime I'll just use the word '
'.I read that as well
Hmmm . . . a lawyer (who we all trust of course), oh wait, one of Lance's (who we all trust) lawyers at that, has put forward the suggestion that their client be put through a lie-detector test, in order to prove beyond any reasonable doubt of course, that their client is now sooo adept at telling fibs that he will of course sail through the test without a care in the world, a smug grin plastered across his face . . . whereas some of his former team-mates knowing their testimonies are as close to the truth as is possible, watch the machine madly tracing a bunch of false negatives as their nerves get the better of them. . .
Genius idea, or has my cynicism got the better of me?
[/tongue-in-cheek]
Hmmm . . . a lawyer (who we all trust of course), oh wait, one of Lance's (who we all trust) lawyers at that, has put forward the suggestion that their client be put through a lie-detector test, in order to prove beyond any reasonable doubt of course, that their client is now sooo adept at telling fibs that he will of course sail through the test without a care in the world, a smug grin plastered across his face . . . whereas some of his former team-mates knowing their testimonies are as close to the truth as is possible, watch the machine madly tracing a bunch of false negatives as their nerves get the better of them. . .
Genius idea, or has my cynicism got the better of me?
[/tongue-in-cheek]
Rocksteadyeddie said:
Articles like this make me wonder about why the federal case was dropped under such suspect circumstances.
My guess would be that they don't think they could secure a conviction against him. He is still very popular, even after this report. With a jury of 12 people with a lot of he said she said testimony they obviously didn't think there was enough to convince 12 Americans he was/is guilty.
That's not to say more won't come out of the woodwork not it's truly out in the open. You only have to see cases like Jimmy S and Catholic Priests etc that once the spotlight is on it, a lot more people are willing to provide information.
London424 said:
Rocksteadyeddie said:
Articles like this make me wonder about why the federal case was dropped under such suspect circumstances.
My guess would be that they don't think they could secure a conviction against him. He is still very popular, even after this report. With a jury of 12 people with a lot of he said she said testimony they obviously didn't think there was enough to convince 12 Americans he was/is guilty.
That's not to say more won't come out of the woodwork not it's truly out in the open. You only have to see cases like Jimmy S and Catholic Priests etc that once the spotlight is on it, a lot more people are willing to provide information.
ds like Soovy & Tonks would unleash hell on it and Soov & Tonks are a cpl of pussies compared to the courtroom brawlers you get in the States.You remove the amateur sporting boys from the game though and make it into criminal and civic proceedings with fraud, perjury and tort actions on the table and its a very very very different legal game. The sharks are into town and we dont mean the basking ones. The USDA should have taken this view from the state, co-ordinated the evidence gathering and got the big boys involved. It would have saved itself so much s
t. But then Travis wouldnt be "The Man Who Got Lance".Even if you think the case against him is weak, the case in defence is even weaker. There's only so much that can be batted away. I suspect that the holes in the dyke will only multiply when more people bring forth evidence. There must be a tonne more people with something to tell. It could take years, but it will come.
JuniorD said:
Even if you think the case against him is weak, the case in defence is even weaker. There's only so much that can be batted away. I suspect that the holes in the dyke will only multiply when more people bring forth evidence. There must be a tonne more people with something to tell. It could take years, but it will come.
You've still got to convince a jury though. Cancer survivor, Livestrong work...there is a lot of emotional attachment to him for many Americans.My view is that with the evidence as presented in the report it wouldn't be enough to convict him in the law courts.
London424 said:
JuniorD said:
Even if you think the case against him is weak, the case in defence is even weaker. There's only so much that can be batted away. I suspect that the holes in the dyke will only multiply when more people bring forth evidence. There must be a tonne more people with something to tell. It could take years, but it will come.
You've still got to convince a jury though. Cancer survivor, Livestrong work...there is a lot of emotional attachment to him for many Americans.My view is that with the evidence as presented in the report it wouldn't be enough to convict him in the law courts.
el stovey said:
London424 said:
JuniorD said:
Even if you think the case against him is weak, the case in defence is even weaker. There's only so much that can be batted away. I suspect that the holes in the dyke will only multiply when more people bring forth evidence. There must be a tonne more people with something to tell. It could take years, but it will come.
You've still got to convince a jury though. Cancer survivor, Livestrong work...there is a lot of emotional attachment to him for many Americans.My view is that with the evidence as presented in the report it wouldn't be enough to convict him in the law courts.
el stovey said:
London424 said:
Earlier today rocksteadyeddie linked to an article wondering why the Federal case was dropped. This is a continuation of my views on the matter.
That was a completely different case covering defrauding sponsors, it had a completely different remit and limitations.http://espn.go.com/olympics/cycling/story/_/id/753...
el stovey said:
London424 said:
Earlier today rocksteadyeddie linked to an article wondering why the Federal case was dropped. This is a continuation of my views on the matter.
That was a completely different case covering defrauding sponsors, it had a completely different remit and limitations.Rocksteadyeddie said:
As was the article that was linked to. Hence the question.
Er OK, the federal case was dropped through lack of evidence, the USADA case operated in a completely different way and isn't a criminal prosecution. USADA can act pretty much how they want as they are a kind of quasi governmental body. They can proceed with evidence and testimonies that wouldn't be admissible in a federal case.Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff