Subpoenas Issued in Cycling Inquiry



steve

Administrator
Staff member
Aug 12, 2001
5,276
394
83
nytimes.com said:
Federal authorities investigating possible fraud and doping charges against Lance Armstrong and his associates have issued grand jury subpoenas to witnesses, according to several people briefed on the case.
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/14/sports/cycling/14cyclinginquiry.html?_r=2&hpw

This will obviously have a very negative effect on cycling, perhaps its finally time for the sport to take its medicine and deal with issues once and for all.

Do you think pro cycling can be cleaned up?
 

roadhouse

New Member
Aug 2, 2009
2,687
4
0
but I am eagerly awaiting the proceedings of this Floyd Landis/Lance Armstrong case in the hopes that some finality on doping in cycling is found.
 

genedan

New Member
Feb 13, 2010
339
2
0
Nope! It's in our nature to lie cheat and steal!!! It helps us gather resources and acquire territory to attract mates and provide for our offspring, it's been built into our DNA after eons of evolution!

Not to worry though, if it's ever the case that another invasive species threatens our existence, we will thank our lying, cheating, and stealing genes that will enable us to fight for our own kind...

Man, this case would have been so much easier to solve if Landis hadn't been such a liar when he got caught. Anyway, the negotiators will have to do some ballsy negotiating to get something out of the former Posties, i.e., we'll give you a lesser punishment and/or perks if you cooperate, etc.

I'm curious as to what Tyler Hamilton will say. It's my guess that he was totally doped up...Virenque-style. Will he confess?
 

alienator

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2004
12,596
310
0
Yojimbo_ said:
Word on the street? What street and who says?

That's the internet street, where everything is true and rumor whores go to suck on the conjecture ***. Why, I bet the people investigating Landis' claims will even get testimony from all the internet forum doping mavens...heck, they must have credibility, right?
 

fastalarms

New Member
Jul 6, 2010
29
0
0
Does someone know what the legal stance is on this case?

For Lance to be prosecuted under UCI rules then blood samples with a strict record of containment from tampering and positive A and B results must be shown.
I am reasonably sure that no such samples exist.
This only then leads to heresay evidence.
That is Lance can deny whatever people say about him and claim they have motives for doing so.
You have already mentioned that some people may give evidence in return for benefits.
Surely that would make jurors question the reliability of that evidence.
Since doping isn't a criminal offence only a sporting one surely it is in the sports best interest for everyone to suddenly develop amnesia.
Anyone previously banned for doping will only appear to have sour grapes or axes to grind.
Will someone who refuses to testify be jailed for perjury?
I cannot see how a federal case for a non criminal offence is going to work as the UCI has the juristriction for doping crimes but not the technical evidence and the federal courts may get the verdict from a jury but not the juristriction to punish.
Or am I being naive or just too sensible?
 

tonyzackery

Well-Known Member
Dec 23, 2006
3,517
80
0
56
genedan said:
Nope! It's in our nature to lie cheat and steal!!! It helps us gather resources and acquire territory to attract mates and provide for our offspring, it's been built into our DNA after eons of evolution!

Not to worry though, if it's ever the case that another invasive species threatens our existence, we will thank our lying, cheating, and stealing genes that will enable us to fight for our own kind...

Gotta say, "speak for yourself" on this one...you're using "our", "us", "we" waaaayyy too loosely for my tastes...behavior starts at the individual and personal level, and that's where accountability and responsibility properly reside...I understand you're trying to make a point, but concealing personal behavior behind group rationalization just doesn't fly with me...

Regarding the investigation, I sincerely hope everything that needs to be exposed gets exposed, and those that should have crashed and burned long ago, finally do...
 

Bro Deal

New Member
Jun 26, 2006
6,698
4
0
fastalarms said:
Does someone know what the legal stance is on this case?

For Lance to be prosecuted under UCI rules then blood samples with a strict record of containment from tampering and positive A and B results must be shown.
I am reasonably sure that no such samples exist.
This only then leads to heresay evidence.
That is Lance can deny whatever people say about him and claim they have motives for doing so.
You have already mentioned that some people may give evidence in return for benefits.
Surely that would make jurors question the reliability of that evidence.
Since doping isn't a criminal offence only a sporting one surely it is in the sports best interest for everyone to suddenly develop amnesia.
Anyone previously banned for doping will only appear to have sour grapes or axes to grind.
Will someone who refuses to testify be jailed for perjury?
I cannot see how a federal case for a non criminal offence is going to work as the UCI has the juristriction for doping crimes but not the technical evidence and the federal courts may get the verdict from a jury but not the juristriction to punish.
Or am I being naive or just too sensible?

Ask Kayle Leogrande about the term "non-analytical positive."

People testifying about things they personally saw or heard is not hearsay. It is a good idea to not use words if you don't know their meaning.

Trek is first up for a subpoena. The company will confirm how many bikes were given to Tailwind Sports, and then Tailwind will have to explain what happened to the money from the bike sales. Fifty or sixty bikes sold per year instead of being used for team will mean half a million dollars will have to be accounted for.
 

fastalarms

New Member
Jul 6, 2010
29
0
0
kayle was punished by the American anti drug agency not the UCI which has the juristriction in the TDF.
 

vitamin s

New Member
Feb 21, 2007
167
0
0
ill bet the shack is not going anywhere near their winning formula now.....it's worked out better than i thought. if the aso excluded them from the race, everyone would still have questions about what ifs, but now theres no question. they dont perform the same when off the funny stuff. their having a shat tour and are going home to a worldwide investigation.......karma is a b!tch
 

alienator

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2004
12,596
310
0
vitamin s said:
ill bet the shack is not going anywhere near their winning formula now.....it's worked out better than i thought. if the aso excluded them from the race, everyone would still have questions about what ifs, but now theres no question. they dont perform the same when off the funny stuff. their having a shat tour and are going home to a worldwide investigation.......karma is a b!tch

What amazing evidence based discoveries you've made! Clearly, there can be no other explanation! Once again, the doping rumor whores find the answer!
 

Bro Deal

New Member
Jun 26, 2006
6,698
4
0
fastalarms said:
kayle was punished by the American anti drug agency not the UCI which has the juristriction in the TDF.

The UCI does not "punish" anyone for doping. The UCI refers matters to the national federation, which then can use whatever anti-doping agency and support that is provided by their country.
 

Bro Deal

New Member
Jun 26, 2006
6,698
4
0
fastalarms said:
Are there any samples of Armstrongs blood still available and elligible for testing?

Armstrong was offered the chance to have his 1999 urine samples retested. He refused because he knew they would again test positive for EPO. Those samples are still available.
 

roadhouse

New Member
Aug 2, 2009
2,687
4
0
fastalarms said:
I cannot see how a federal case for a non criminal offence is going to work as the UCI has the juristriction for doping crimes but not the technical evidence and the federal courts may get the verdict from a jury but not the juristriction to punish.
Or am I being naive or just too sensible?


Us Team Postal was funded via The United Statesof America's money, if any of the funded monies used were involved in any illegal proceedings aka doping, then it is a federal case and has supreme jurisdiction hence the federal prosecutor assigned to the case and it is not so much about the doping and whether or not Lance did but what happened to the US money which should lead to a few more open doors if that is the case.

remember that movie Alcatraz, where Kevin Bacon at the age of 13 stole food from a store that sold US stamps and served as a post office so it was a federal crime? that kind of thing.
 

jhuskey

Moderator
Oct 6, 2003
10,606
678
113
Postal had several sponsors as I remember. I can't even remember them all, maybe Subaru and a flooring company.
If I am understanding the main issue so far it is that bikes were sold to buy banned substances and I would imagine these bikes were directly supplied by Trek and Trek has been subpoenaed.
RH, I don't think the FBI would be involved just yet, however given a slightly different scenario your summation might be plausible.
 

Bro Deal

New Member
Jun 26, 2006
6,698
4
0
roadhouse said:
Us Team Postal was funded via The United Statesof America's money, if any of the funded monies used were involved in any illegal proceedings aka doping, then it is a federal case and has supreme jurisdiction hence the federal prosecutor assigned to the case and it is not so much about the doping and whether or not Lance did but what happened to the US money which should lead to a few more open doors if that is the case.

remember that movie Alcatraz, where Kevin Bacon at the age of 13 stole food from a store that sold US stamps and served as a post office so it was a federal crime? that kind of thing.

There is more than just that. FLandis has said that when he joined Phonak, Ochowicz arranged to have him set up a Swiss bank account with UBS so that he could evade U.S. taxes. Ochowicz has a long relationship with Armstrong and U.S. cycling. He has worked for Armstrong's patron, Tom Wiesel, managing the money of high worth individuals. It is reasonable to assume that Landis was not the first cyclist he advised to setup foreign bank accounts. There could be a huge can of worms there.

Now to make things more interesting, Armstrong today denied that he was ever an owner of Tailwind Sports, a for profit company that managed the Postal and Disco teams. He claims that the contracts will bear this out. But Armstrong himself said in a deposition that he owned part of Tailwind. There are also numerous other instances of Armstrong and people around him claiming that he is a part owner. It looks like there was an off the books agreement between Armstrong and Tailwins, and it is likely that this agreement resulted in profits being paid to Armstrong, perhaps through the same types of bank accounts that his good buddy Oshowicz like to setup for cyclists.

The chief investigator, Novitsky, was formerly an investigator for the IRS. He should be an expert at these sorts of issues.
 

roadhouse

New Member
Aug 2, 2009
2,687
4
0
jhuskey said:
Postal had several sponsors as I remember. I can't even remember them all, maybe Subaru and a flooring company.
If I am understanding the main issue so far it is that bikes were sold to buy banned substances and I would imagine these bikes were directly supplied by Trek and Trek has been subpoenaed.
RH, I don't think the FBI would be involved just yet, however given a slightly different scenario your summation might be plausible.

Federal prosecutor to boost investigation into Landis doping claims

If Landis’ claims are substantiated by others and found to be true, prison sentences could be one possible outcome of the USPS team investigation. That would most likely depend on Novitzky being able to show that fraud was committed. As the US Postal team was essentially funded by taxpayers’ money, any evidence that shows such funding was used inappropriately could have very serious consequences.