Simeoni case dropped! Lance walks!

[bobke]

So after stirring the pot, Simeoni withdraws his case in Rome.

Armstrong trial ends, charges withdrawn
ROME — Lance Armstrong's defamation trial ended Thursday after charges were withdrawn by Italian cyclist Filippo Simeoni.

Armstrong also withdrew his defamation action against Simeoni, the lawyer for the Tour de France great said. Neither Armstrong nor Simeoni was at the court in Latina, near Rome.

"The case is over after both actions have been withdrawn," lawyer Enrico Nan said.

Simeoni brought defamation charges against Armstrong following an April 2003 report in the French newspaper Le Monde. In the article, Armstrong contended that Simeoni had agreed to testify against doctor Michele Ferrari in exchange for a lesser penalty if the Italian rider were accused of doping by the sport's governing body.

Ferrari received a suspended jail sentence for a year in October 2004 for sports fraud and malpractice. Ferrari once advised Armstrong, but the seven-time Tour de France champion cut his ties with him after the doctor was convicted.

Armstrong had already been cleared in another case brought against him by Simeoni. He had accused Armstrong of chasing him down during an early stage breakaway in the 2004 Tour de France and threatening him for testifying about doping in Ferrari's trial.

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/gen/ap/CYC_Armstrong_Trial.html

 

[barnstorm]

yawn

 

[tcklyde]

yawn

Ditto.

 

[quil]

Armstrong trial ends, charges withdrawn

Changing channel *click*

 

[bobke]

Changing channel *click*

my point exactly

 

[VeloFlash]

Misleading forum topic by original poster.

"Simeoni case dropped! Lance Walks!"

I suggest: "Simeoni and Armstrong withdraw actions against each other. Who lost out in the monetary settlement?"

Litigation that has been on foot for three years does not spontaneously come to a point after heavy legal costs that both parties agree to withdraw their actions. One party with the most to lose capitulated and settled in favour of the other party.

 

[bobke]

Misleading forum topic by original poster.

"Simeoni case dropped! Lance Walks!"

I suggest: "Simeoni and Armstrong withdraw actions against each other. Who lost out in the monetary settlement?"

Litigation that has been on foot for three years does not spontaneously come to a point after heavy legal costs that both parties agree to withdraw their actions. One party with the most to lose capitulated and settled in favour of the other party.

They both had defamation cases against each other.
Who knows what happened?
Lance could have paid them off, or Simeoni's attorney may have gotten tired if it looked like he wasnt gonna get paid, since Simeoni had lost all the other cases...
Its over though, which is the big point.

I note where Barry Bonds looks to be getting charged for lying to a grand jury, perjury.

 

[VeloFlash]

They both had defamation cases against each other.
Who knows what happened?
Lance could have paid them off, or Simeoni's attorney may have gotten tired if it looked like he wasnt gonna get paid, since Simeoni had lost all the other cases...
Its over though, which is the big point.

I note where Barry Bonds looks to be getting charged for lying to a grand jury, perjury.

Your unfounded speculation that Simeoni may not be able to fund his action does not mean that Armstrong becomes gratuitous and agrees to drop his action.

Pugnacious Armstrong would continue and inflict monetary damages on Simeoni.

It is more likely that Armstrong would settle as he has too much litigation on foot and any loss would damage his retirement earning capacity. The Sunday Times litigation in London had been adjourned until March 2006. There has been no news on this action. If The Sunday Times has been able to amend their defences (which may be the cause of the adjournment) to include the L'Equipe findings then Armstrong may be considering settling this action also.

 

[bobke]

Your unfounded speculation that Simeoni may not be able to fund his action does not mean that Armstrong becomes gratuitous and agrees to drop his action.

Pugnacious Armstrong would continue and inflict monetary damages on Simeoni.

It is more likely that Armstrong would settle as he has too much litigation on foot and any loss would damage his retirement earning capacity. The Sunday Times litigation in London had been adjourned until March 2006. There has been no news on this action. If The Sunday Times has been able to amend their defences (which may be the cause of the adjournment) to include the L'Equipe findings then Armstrong may be considering settling this action also.

We'll see.