[Strategy]

Wow. Had really not seen this one coming.

[N.B.O.L.]

Strategy, on 13 June 2012 - 09:09 PM, said:

Wow. Had really not seen this one coming.

This is June and not April isn't it?

The question then, since they are also saying that Bruynell was involved and he is a DS for a US registered team, is he also suspended?

This post has been edited by N.B.O.L.: 13 June 2012 - 09:22 PM

[Leafcake]

Thoughts:
Is this why Hincapie most recently announced his retirement?
Will they make this stick? It seems awfully motivated by a great deal of vendetta with little analytical evidence to go by.

Fast forward to CAS, in two (?) three (?)... years from now. Testimonies to be shredded?

[N.B.O.L.]

From the article Strategy linked above,

Quote

"...the agency alleged that some of Armstrong's blood samples from 2009 and 2010 were "fully consistent with blood manipulation including EPO use and/or blood transfusions."

So this is a blood passport case. It is now 2012, so it took 3 years to be able to properly evaluate the passport info!

I'm not naive enough to think that "never tested positive" means anything, but this seems like a smoke and mirror/he said, she said type prosecution.

It will be interesting to see if LA is really through fighting as he said in the Men's Journal article or if this is just too much of an affront to his ego. The printed response on his website and the fact that his attorney is making statements seems to indicate he might not be as through as he said.

[Jayhawk]

There have been rumors of this for awhile, but it's hard to separate out what's rumor with some basis to it vs. wishful thinking. I'd assumed it was the latter. Wow...!

Is this what the papers were about that were served to Bruyneel in San Francisco several weeks ago?

"engaged in a massive doping conspiracy from 1998-2011"
Them's strong words.

[Jayhawk]

from CN:

Quote

Key Points to USADA's case

Targets listed in USADA letter:

Johan Bruyneel (team director)
Dr. Pedro Celaya (team doctor)
Dr. Luis Garcia del Moral (team doctor)
Dr. Michele Ferrari (consulting doctor)
Pepe Marti (team trainer)
Lance Armstrong (rider)

(see link to CN for more information)

Comments: The UCI claiming they aren't aware of the information. Good. Keep them out of it. And Pepe Marti, doesn't he still work with Contador?

EDIT: I cropped most of the info and added a link to CN on their request instead Jayhawk, hope you don't mind!

This post has been edited by VdB: 14 June 2012 - 12:40 PM

[Leafcake]

Jayhawk, on 14 June 2012 - 12:04 AM, said:

Comments: The UCI claiming they aren't aware of the information. Good. Keep them out of it. And Pepe Marti, doesn't he still work with Contador?

Don't know about Marti, but Celaya still team doctor with Bruyneel's current team.

[Jayhawk]

re Pepe Marti & Contador:

"USADA's evidence gathered in investigation of potential doping on ... Astana (2009)...."

Hooboy, another can of worms... Andy Schleck might win two TdFs this year (2010 & 2009) without having to ride at all.

Ullrich's suspension is backdated only to May 2005, so presumably he gets LA's titles.

[N.B.O.L.]

So with an 8 year statute of limitations they could take away TDF '04 & '05 leaving him a 5 time winner.

[N.B.O.L.]

Jayhawk, on 14 June 2012 - 12:18 AM, said:

Ullrich's suspension is backdated only to May 2005, so presumably he gets LA's titles.

If his suspension is backdated to May 2005 that leaves out the '05 title, so the only one he could get would be '04.

[Leafcake]

The letter:

http://online.wsj.co...harging0613.pdf

[buddy]

Well I can't say that the news really pleases me but ....... ok yes I can say it. The news pleases me that Armstrong will finally be held to account for his years of allegedly lying to all and sundry except the doctors in the hospital room ...or Betsy and Franky ..... but then he allegedly lied about that.

This is still going to take a long time to resolve but at least the wheels are now firmly in motion. Will he fight it or not ....

I can see a situation where he doesn't fight it .... just lets them do what they want and then bags the decision as a witch hunt that proved nothing as he's the most tested person on the planet and never failed a drug test ....oh thats right ....he forgets about the 1999 tour failed test. Many Many people will gladly accept his version of events. Just like many did with both Floyd and Tyler.

LA may well go to his grave still declaring he was innocent.

The interesting thing is that the other people who have also been charged. It will only take for one of them to roll over and the LA walls come tumbling down. There must be a lot of eveidence to go through with the charges and who knows if these other personnel will have the desire to fight it. They aren't all as well off as LA.

I have non cycling friend who ask me what is to be served by bring LA down even if he did do these things when he has retired. I have asked myself that question and for me it is the flasehood that was his career. It was the LA supporters who couldn't wait for him to open his special can of whoop ass in the tour and gloated when he did. Many of us knew what that can really was.

Cycling has been a dirty sport .... probably still has the dirty element. I am hopeful that it is getting cleaner. I think the racing we are seeing is a sign of that. Now to just remove the dirty doctors and directors that don't know any other way.

For Bruyneel to fall will send a powerful message to the other dirty DS's.

I think the USADA has given me greater hope. This is a great day. A great day for clean riding.

Thanks,

Buddy

This post has been edited by buddy: 14 June 2012 - 11:37 AM

[Jayhawk]

N.B.O.L., on 14 June 2012 - 12:40 AM, said:

If his suspension is backdated to May 2005 that leaves out the '05 title, so the only one he could get would be '04.

Sounds like all LA's results may be DQ'd. From page 14:


"It is also the law that evidence of doping throughout the entire time period as described is relevant and will be admissible in any eventual hearing for at least two reasons: (1) evidence of doping and evidence of conspiratorial acts outside any applicable limitations period can be used to corroborate evidence within the limitations period, and (2) as explained in USADA vs. Hellebuyck (copy provided as Attachment D) results outside the limitations period can be disqualified where reliance on the statute of limitations has been waived through false statements, fraudulent concealment, and other wrongful conduct."

[N.B.O.L.]

Leafcake, on 14 June 2012 - 12:42 AM, said:

The letter:

http://online.wsj.co...harging0613.pdf

That is an interesting read. It looks like they are going after results beyond the 8 year statute of limitation period. I thought that they were only allowed to bring in that information to prove a pattern of conduct in support of the period inside the 8 years. But ...

Quote

results outside the limitations period can be disqualified where reliance on the statute of limitations has been waived through false statements, fraudulent concealment or other wrongful conduct

That seems to me to be saying that if you do anything to conceal your act then you've waived the statute of limitations. That would seem to me that would for all practical purpose mean that there is no statute of limitations, which I don't think I like very much.

Jayhawk, I swear it didn't take me 35 minutes to type this, and your post wasn't showing on my computer yet when I started.

This post has been edited by N.B.O.L.: 14 June 2012 - 01:43 AM

[crockett]

if this news broke 5 years ago, the server would have crashed.
Bymy calculations, if I have this right, wouldntthe doping infractions turn Levi into a 4 time TDF champ?

[Leafcake]

Luskin's letter to USADA on June 8th
http://online.wsj.co...awyerletter.pdf
from which it appears that USADA addressed Armstrong's representatives on June 4th, seeking his prompt full confession.

Luskin's answer to USADA raises questions as to whether there has been unlawful disclosure of grand jury information to USADA's investigation, especially as “Travis Tygrant participated in [the federal investigation] witness interviews with Jeff Novitzky” and offered inducements to witnesses in the federal case.

[micomico]

N.B.O.L., on 14 June 2012 - 12:36 AM, said:

So with an 8 year statute of limitations they could take away TDF '04 & '05 leaving him a 5 time winner.

Ironic that 1 month ago Ivan thought he had a good chance to win a Grand Tour. Little did he know it would be the TdF.

[micomico]

Jayhawk, on 14 June 2012 - 01:06 AM, said:

Sounds like all LA's results may be DQ'd. From page 14:


"It is also the law that evidence of doping throughout the entire time period as described is relevant and will be admissible in any eventual hearing for at least two reasons: (1) evidence of doping and evidence of conspiratorial acts outside any applicable limitations period can be used to corroborate evidence within the limitations period, and (2) as explained in USADA vs. Hellebuyck (copy provided as Attachment D) results outside the limitations period can be disqualified where reliance on the statute of limitations has been waived through false statements, fraudulent concealment, and other wrongful conduct."

Good eye, Jayhawk.

Makes me wonder if this means he is will be unable to participate in the Iron Man in Oct. I just got back from Kauai yesterday; saw signs encouraging some people training for it. LA has been on the big island training hard for this. The timing must be exquisitely painful for him if so.

[micomico]

buddy, on 14 June 2012 - 12:55 AM, said:

The interesting thing is that the other people who have also been charged. It will only take for one of them to roll over and the LA walls come tumbling down. There must be a lot of eveidence to go through with the charges and who knows if these other personnel will have the desire to fight it. They aren't all as well off as LA.

The letter has an interesting twist to it. It announces that, as proof, it has a large number of witnesses testifying against each of the defendants.

With LA, though, here is the twist - it goes beyond witnesses; in addition, it says that it relies on a urine test that was indicative of EPO use according to a lab director, and blood collections indicative of blood manipulation, giving no information regarding source.

I don't know; if LA does not mount a defense, if passively accepting the verdict, as implied in his latest magazine article (great article on a man who spends time with bull sharks without a cage, by the way), if it may open the door for civil suits filed against him later. Floyd has a whistleblower claim in.

Not sure what slander issues may arise if LA's statements about those that accused him are proved in the course of the investigation to be malicious/false/defamatory. In other countries, the threshold for slander is lower than in the U.S.

And Betsy, O'Reilly and others who, if this is true, have called it as they see it, and have taken hits from many, must feel a sense of vindication.

Many in the justice dept, including a number of investigators, thought they had a very good case against LA. But it would be up to a jury, and Bond's trial showed that all you need is one to make it a prosecutor's nightmare.

This is a different ballgame - best of three arbitrators.

This post has been edited by micomico: 14 June 2012 - 05:36 AM

[buddy]

One interesting thing after reading the USADA letter was the mention of the penalty potentially being a lifetime ban from the sport.

Two years is one thing ... lifetime a little more permanent. That may make LA want to fight the charges. No more triathlon.

It will be very intersting to see what evidence comes out when it is time. They must have some very good testimony from credible witnesses to make the charges they have.

It has started to get interesting.

In regards to Luskin's letter to William Bock he is good at throwing out accusations himself. How does Mr. Luskin know of all the evidence that the USADA has in their posession and how it was obtained.

I really love the following: ....." your blind embrace of witnesses whom every other responsible person has found unworthy of belief ..."

How does Mr. Luskin know who these unworthy witnesses are? He may be insinuating Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton. But what about George Hincapie, Franky Andreau, etc. Has any credibility been tarnished in regards to them. I know his letter is to rally the support of those who still want to believe. It is the same aggressive crap that has always been pushed by the LA team ....never having tested positive. Ha ....go back to the 1999 tour. Or does a covered up positive not count.

The truth will out and I am looking forward to it. I am sure David Walsh is looking forward to it as well.

Thanks,

Buddy

This post has been edited by buddy: 14 June 2012 - 11:36 AM