Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Professional Cycling For the Fans Follow the Tour de France,the Giro de Italia, the Spring Classics, or other professional cycling races? Here's your home...

User Tag List

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-07-12, 09:17 AM   #1
LemondFanForeve
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasadena, CA(for now)
Bikes:
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
WADA Urges Feds To Turn Over All Evidence On Armstrong

Looks like he might not be completely out of hot water yet. WADA is urging the feds to turn over "significant evidence (proof)" about Armstrong doping. I cant post the link/article, as Im posting from my phone. However, it is posted on the front page of yahoo, so someone can post it here, if they wouldnt mind?
LemondFanForeve is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 10:00 AM   #2
Bucko Mi
Junior Member
 
Bucko Mi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news?slug=ap-armstrong-wada
Bucko Mi is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 10:20 AM   #3
LemondFanForeve
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasadena, CA(for now)
Bikes:
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucko Mi View Post
Thanks alot, Interesting read.
LemondFanForeve is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 10:56 AM   #4
Giacomo 1 
Senior Member
 
Giacomo 1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Queens NYC
Bikes:
Posts: 2,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemondFanForeve View Post
WADA is urging the feds to turn over "significant evidence (proof)" about Armstrong doping.
The word "proof" doesn't show-up anywhere in the article after "significant evidence".

If there were proof, the criminal case would not have been dropped.

Not very objective of you to add that word...
__________________
Colnago Super
Torelli Pista
Basso Gap
Fabio Barecci
Miyata 1400A

It never gets easier, you just go faster. ~ Greg LeMond
Giacomo 1 is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 12:04 PM   #5
LemondFanForeve
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasadena, CA(for now)
Bikes:
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Significant Evidence=proof

Nothing to be objective about really. Having read between the lines, thats essentially what they said. Doesnt matter if the charges were dropped, there was still significant evidence to allow it to get to where it did. WADA must feel there is, or they wouldnt be asking for it?

Last edited by LemondFanForeve; 02-07-12 at 12:12 PM.
LemondFanForeve is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 12:15 PM   #6
jbenkert111
Coffee Stud
 
jbenkert111's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Annapolis, MD
Bikes: Fuji ALOHA TT, Scott Speedster 35, Nashbar Road Bike, Marin MTB, Dolomite Fat Bike
Posts: 201
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
How I read it......

"Significant Evidence" A large amount of material about doping in the cycling community. NOT necessarily about Armstrong.
jbenkert111 is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 12:22 PM   #7
Farby
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NY
Bikes:
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Guaranteed this goes nowhere.
Farby is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 02:17 PM   #8
Giacomo 1 
Senior Member
 
Giacomo 1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Queens NYC
Bikes:
Posts: 2,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemondFanForeve View Post
Significant Evidence=proof

Nothing to be objective about really. Having read between the lines, thats essentially what they said. Doesnt matter if the charges were dropped, there was still significant evidence to allow it to get to where it did. WADA must feel there is, or they wouldnt be asking for it?
It matters very much that the charges were dropped. The "significant evidence" didn't lead to "proof" of guilt, or "prove" him guilty. If the evidence were that conclusive, the criminal charges would not have been dropped. DA's are suckers for publicity and any DA would love to have a Lance Armstrong conviction on their resumes.
__________________
Colnago Super
Torelli Pista
Basso Gap
Fabio Barecci
Miyata 1400A

It never gets easier, you just go faster. ~ Greg LeMond
Giacomo 1 is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 02:51 PM   #9
canam73
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Haunchyville
Bikes:
Posts: 6,375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
The federal investigation that was dropped was investigating fraud and misuse of funds. It is possible they obtained evidence of LA doping but if he didn't use Postal money for it or influence the rest of the team to partake then it would not support the criminal case.

It could be used by the USADA to disqualify his results as they still have on going non-criminal investigation.
canam73 is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 03:06 PM   #10
Rodimus_Prime
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Bikes:
Posts: 137
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This whole thing needs to just end, no sense in tarnishing a man with circumstancial evidence aquired by known dopers and cheats. Has there ever been a single person actually clean making these claims?

I think theres enough proof out there that age 37 he could still finish on the podium against a "known" doper, that hes clean and always has been.

What I'm fearful for is that this crap is going to be still going on 5 years from now trying to prove or disprove things from 15 years ago. With that being said, if they didn't strip Riis of the 1996 Tour de France in which HE OPENLY ADMITTED to doping, then you shouldnt strip anyone else without real evidence, not just the opinions of known liars. Really if you can't find that evidence within a year or two then the whole thing needs to closed and final, because if you can't find enough evidence within that amount of time then it's probably not legit in the first place.
Rodimus_Prime is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 04:05 PM   #11
kleinboogie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Bikes:
Posts: 2,607
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm going to laugh up my lunch if the WADA charges the people who testified.
kleinboogie is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 04:37 PM   #12
telebianchi
Senior Member
 
telebianchi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Bikes: 2014 Trek Domane 5.2, 2003 Fuji Cross, 2010 Giant Trance, 2006 K2 Mod 4.0, 2010 Schwinn Madison
Posts: 1,279
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My two thoughts:

(1) Aren't there rules & laws restricting what information can be released out of a grand jury investigation if an indictment is not made?

(2) While I don't doubt that there are people in WADA who would be interested in evidence against Lance Armstrong, based on statements in the linked article I think they are also hoping that there would be evidence concerning other riders including those that may still be active in the sport.
telebianchi is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 04:48 PM   #13
LemondFanForeve
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasadena, CA(for now)
Bikes:
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giacomo 1 View Post
It matters very much that the charges were dropped. The "significant evidence" didn't lead to "proof" of guilt, or "prove" him guilty. If the evidence were that conclusive, the criminal charges would not have been dropped. DA's are suckers for publicity and any DA would love to have a Lance Armstrong conviction on their resumes.
Youve missed the point: WADA must have a difference of opinion on everything, or else they wouldnt be asking for the info. Theyre probably looking to bust someone, be it: Contador/Armstrong/whoever, or else they wouldnt be asking for something that supposedly doesnt exist?
LemondFanForeve is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 05:05 PM   #14
kleinboogie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Bikes:
Posts: 2,607
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by telebianchi View Post
(1) Aren't there rules & laws restricting what information can be released out of a grand jury investigation if an indictment is not made?
http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidelines/206584.htm
http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/fo...le9/11mcrm.htm


Good question. There is. I'm not an attorney but the DOJ website has the legal jargon on it (link above). From what I can tell, the WADA would make a Freedom Of Information Act request. A determination by a judge would be made to decide what can and cannot be released to protect the innocence of all parties. GL getting that.
kleinboogie is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 05:17 PM   #15
Giacomo 1 
Senior Member
 
Giacomo 1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Queens NYC
Bikes:
Posts: 2,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemondFanForeve View Post
Youve missed the point: WADA must have a difference of opinion on everything, or else they wouldnt be asking for the info. Theyre probably looking to bust someone, be it: Contador/Armstrong/whoever, or else they wouldnt be asking for something that supposedly doesnt exist?
There might be useful information and there might not be. I think WADA could be grasping for anything at this point in the hope they find something useful.

In any case, it's time for this thing to be dropped. I have little faith that WADA, upon recieving this information, would bring there "trial" to a speedy or conclusive conclusion. So as Americans, one has to ask, how long can you drag somebody through the mud before it becomes harrasement? Isn't this a form of double jeopardy, or even unending jeopardy? Don't we have the right to a speedy trial and judgement? Our judicial system has become a mockery of our Founding Fathers intent...
__________________
Colnago Super
Torelli Pista
Basso Gap
Fabio Barecci
Miyata 1400A

It never gets easier, you just go faster. ~ Greg LeMond
Giacomo 1 is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 05:27 PM   #16
Commodus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Burnaby, BC
Bikes:
Posts: 4,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kleinboogie View Post
http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidelines/206584.htm
http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/fo...le9/11mcrm.htm


Good question. There is. I'm not an attorney but the DOJ website has the legal jargon on it (link above). From what I can tell, the WADA would make a Freedom Of Information Act request. A determination by a judge would be made to decide what can and cannot be released to protect the innocence of all parties. GL getting that.
Maybe, maybe not. There's some indication that cooperation could be possible:

Quote:
There are, however, obligations under the UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sport, the 2005 treaty to which the U.S. is a signator. The treaty encourages officials to share relevant evidence with anti-doping authorities. Furthermore there is considerable evidence in this case that had not yet been presented to the grand jury. Some of that could be shared as part of the government’s duty under the treaty or under any cooperative agreements various agencies have with USADA.
Source: http://redkiteprayer.com/?p=7669
Commodus is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 05:34 PM   #17
18hockey
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Bikes:
Posts: 224
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemondFanForeve View Post
Significant Evidence=proof

Nothing to be objective about really. Having read between the lines, thats essentially what they said. Doesnt matter if the charges were dropped, there was still significant evidence to allow it to get to where it did. WADA must feel there is, or they wouldnt be asking for it?
Interesting how you are all about reading between the lines when it comes to Armstrong...but anything like that about other riders you are quick to dismiss.
18hockey is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 06:14 PM   #18
kleinboogie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Bikes:
Posts: 2,607
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodus View Post
Maybe, maybe not. There's some indication that cooperation could be possible:
Source: http://redkiteprayer.com/?p=7669
Yup, I agree it's possible. Anything's possible. Probable? That's another story.
kleinboogie is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 08:37 PM   #19
LemondFanForeve
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasadena, CA(for now)
Bikes:
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
This whole thing needs to just end, no sense in tarnishing a man with circumstancial evidence aquired by known dopers and cheats. Has there ever been a single person actually clean making these claims?

In regards to what, just doping? Then there's a bunch of guys who've been clean and not doped: Hinault/Lemond/Hampsten/Indurain/Bauer/Heiden/Phinney etc. People here keep claiming lemond doped, but when i asked them to actually post any proof of any sort(from a credible source), guess what happened? it never showed up, in the numerous attempts to get it.
LemondFanForeve is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 08:39 PM   #20
LemondFanForeve
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasadena, CA(for now)
Bikes:
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giacomo 1 View Post
There might be useful information and there might not be. I think WADA could be grasping for anything at this point in the hope they find something useful.

In any case, it's time for this thing to be dropped. I have little faith that WADA, upon recieving this information, would bring there "trial" to a speedy or conclusive conclusion. So as Americans, one has to ask, how long can you drag somebody through the mud before it becomes harrasement? Isn't this a form of double jeopardy, or even unending jeopardy? Don't we have the right to a speedy trial and judgement? Our judicial system has become a mockery of our Founding Fathers intent...
I agree that it needs to be dropped. One of my points from the very beginning, has been that Armstrong has allowed this whiole thing to draw out till a few days ago. he's partly to blame for the whole fiasco, as he just couldnt "admit" one way or another to anything. When you do that, it gets dragged out to the point we're @ now. Sad it's had to come to this. But, when you're dishonest, and/or withhold information, thats what happens.
LemondFanForeve is offline  
Old 02-07-12, 09:41 PM   #21
xfimpg
Senior Member
 
xfimpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 3,089
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by canam73 View Post
The federal investigation that was dropped was investigating fraud and misuse of funds. It is possible they obtained evidence of LA doping but if he didn't use Postal money for it or influence the rest of the team to partake then it would not support the criminal case.

It could be used by the USADA to disqualify his results as they still have on going non-criminal investigation.
+1
xfimpg is offline  
Old 02-09-12, 11:45 AM   #22
crazyb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hills of Iowa
Bikes: all diamond frames
Posts: 1,249
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Who funds WADA? USADA? More tax dollars at work?
crazyb is offline  
Old 02-09-12, 05:24 PM   #23
daveF
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 738
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemondFanForeve View Post
Youve missed the point: WADA must have a difference of opinion on everything, or else they wouldnt be asking for the info. Theyre probably looking to bust someone, be it: Contador/Armstrong/whoever, or else they wouldnt be asking for something that supposedly doesnt exist?
I believe you missed the point. WADA has probably seen little to none of the "significant evidence." US Federal Investigators generally share very little information. And, WADA wouldn't be privy to the Grand Jury testimony. WADA doesn't have enough information to have an opinion. They want to obtain the information so they can form one.
daveF is offline  
Old 02-09-12, 06:52 PM   #24
Keith99
Senior Member
 
Keith99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by canam73 View Post
The federal investigation that was dropped was investigating fraud and misuse of funds. It is possible they obtained evidence of LA doping but if he didn't use Postal money for it or influence the rest of the team to partake then it would not support the criminal case.

It could be used by the USADA to disqualify his results as they still have on going non-criminal investigation.
Which contrasted to many of the posts here shows that Lance has the best PR team of any cyclist in history. The way this gets spun is brilliant.
Keith99 is offline  
Old 02-09-12, 07:12 PM   #25
LemondFanForeve
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasadena, CA(for now)
Bikes:
Posts: 1,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveF View Post
I believe you missed the point. WADA has probably seen little to none of the "significant evidence." US Federal Investigators generally share very little information. And, WADA wouldn't be privy to the Grand Jury testimony. WADA doesn't have enough information to have an opinion. They want to obtain the information so they can form one.
Ive missed no point... if WADA "wasnt privy to GJ testimony/evidence" as you claim, then why would they be asking for it, and expect to get it? But if they cant "obtain it" as you claim, then how could they form an opinion of their own? Youve contradicted yourself.
LemondFanForeve is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:45 PM.