buddy

It appears that the Fed’s and the Department of Justice has their sights on Lance Armstrong not just for doping but also for the more serious charges of tax evasion, contract fraud, importing drugs, using US Post Office money to buy illegal pharmaceuticals.

The Fed’s have the ability to “make you an offer one can’t turn down” either testify or go to jail. Lances’ ex wife Kristin refused to answer in a deposition asking if she knew if her ex-husband ever took performance-enhancing drugs. When the Feds go to her and tell her either talk or go to jail. She will talk.

I will predict that either Bill Stapleton or Johan Bruyneel will turn state’s evedence pointing the finger at Lance Armstrong as the head of the crimal enterprise known as Tailwind Sports. Neither one of these men want to go to jail.

It is hard to believe that the Department of Justice will want to destroy a national hero and put Lance into jail. The DOJ is a political office and Lance has many powerful friends. The DOJ could try to cut a deal with Lance. But with a Grand Jurry investigating this matter it becomes hard for the DOJ to drop this matter or to cut a deal. DOJ could offer a deal to Lance were he admits that he doped but the bad guys are Bill Stapleton and Johan Bruyneel.

If Lance goes down it will be sad to see so many good people go down like George Hincapie and the future of professional cycling even Tour De France would be in question.

The Pyrénées mountains are the least of Armstrong’s problems.

PurpleFender

Nice post you have there. Do you have a source?

rogwilco

No it would not. What's done is done. Maybe it would hurt the sport's interest in the USA but nowhere else.

lotek 

There's debate whether Kristen can claim spousal refusal to testify and be within her legal rights.
Tax evasion? hadn't heard that one, Fraud yes but not the evasion, as stated, source?

As for the impact, it will be exactly the same as the Festina affair, or Operation Puerto.
It will impact individuals, and teams, but the sport will go on, continuing to do
what it does.

buddy

Thanks most of my info came from the recent Wall Street journal articles. The information about Kristen Armstrong came from:

https://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cyclin...ory?id=4877992

"By the time that deposition was actually conducted, LeMond had hired DiBoise, who did the questioning. On Herman's advice, Kristin Armstrong declined to respond to a number of direct questions about whether her ex-husband had used or talked about using performance-enhancing drugs. She also said she had little to no knowledge about any business dealings related to Trek or LeMond."

About the federal investigation:

https://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...ong/index.html

Depending on the kinds of factual allegations ultimately levied against Armstrong, he could also b"e exposed to federal racketeering charges under The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). RICO is federal statute that applies to many forms of illegal activity, including drug cases. If Armstrong and others engaged in a continuous and controlled pattern of organizing riders to use or distribute steroids and other illegal substances, RICO would become a more plausible charge. In addition, if Armstrong pressured riders into using drugs without their consent, those riders could in theory use RICO to recover monetary damages. RICO provides for civil recovery and in some cases treble damages."

The lead federal investigator is Jeff Novitzky:

https://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj

"The U.S. investigation, which is being led by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) special agent Jeff Novitzky, began earlier this year. Mr. Novitzky previously led the investigation of The Bay Area Laboratory Cooperative case that implicated many professional athletes in steroid use. He declined to comment."

Info about Novitzky:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Novitzky

ask Barry Bonds about this guy.


It does not look good for Lance. I have the great respect for what Lance has achieved both on the bike and off. His book was a real source of hope when my father diagnosed with cancer. I hope him the best.

slcbob

I would decline to answer any of Greg LeMond's questions, too. Can't fault the woman for that.

When we get to the part where Floyd remembers who put the scotch tape on his eyeballs, please flag the thread. Until then, time for me to opt out of the conspiracy theory threads.

buddy

https://www.velonation.com/News/ID/49...dividuals.aspx

"A couple of guys have confirmed components of what [Landis] said, but what Novitzky is really interested in is not whether Lance Armstrong used EPO to win the Tour de France -- that's not his mandate -- but whether there was tax evasion, contract fraud, importing drugs, using money to buy pharmaceuticals," an individual with knowledge of the investigation told the Washington Post. "That's why the investigation has gone global."

I believe that tax evassion comes from selling the trek bikes and not reporting the income. I remember back in the Team Discovery days that Team Discovery bikes would appear on Ebay and everyone thought it strange.

cuski

Wow, exaggerate much? The Tour was just fine before Lance. The Tour will be fine after as well.

buddy

If Lance and company is proven to be dirty. That would almost kill big time corporate sponsorship. What sponsor would be willing to put their name on any team or rider? Without sponsorship can you have professional biking? You can but it would be on a much smaller scale.

Don't you think that Radio Shake is very concerned that they have bet the future of their company on Lance?

Howzit

The best thing for all involved is just to settle this matter out of the public eye. Lance is an America hero, it was obvious to everyone in the cycling world that he was doped up, but for those he inspired, there is no reason to ruin that image. Caner survivors and fighters gain inspiration from his story, if anything, juts from a humanitarian stand point, they should keep his image clean. The man can be destroyed, but the image should be maintained. All the 99ers who got into cycling should also retain that clean image, its good for the sport.
In turn Lance should quetly stop posing as a hero and slowly retreat from the public eye.

Such a sad situation, but at the end of it all, it does nobody any good to make this a public humiliation.

Laggard

Lance isn't cycling. It makes him look dirty but doesnt necessarily reflect on cycling as a whole.

jimbud

After spending 20 minutes on this forum today to see what was being said about the finish of today's TdF stage I remember why I stopped logging in. I'll never understand how people can take such great pleasure in other peoples problems or bad luck.

OrionKhan

Why are you surprised? Marion Jones did jail time. Look and the Barry Bonds situation. Why should Lance be treated differently?

AMFJ

LOL @ Lance's troubles effecting Radio Shack's future.

Yea, if Lance is found guilty of everything, Radio Shack is going to be what people remember--and take it out on Radio Shack by not buying from them.

Hell with that logic, people will also stop watching the discovery channel and never use the USPS again.

FlashBazbo

One thing is undeniable -- if Lance is "outed", you've got nearly an entire decade of the TdF proven "illegitimate". The winners of nine of the last twelve TdFs proven and strong unproven hints about the other three.

But it IS curious that the DoJ, FDA, et al. are going so hard on Lance. It is a coordinated effort and those agencies don't coordinate much without direction from above. Lance is huge in Democratic Party politics and, by all indications, was a strong candidate to run for elected office. Why would a Democratic administration go after him? Would he have been running against a "favorite son" or daughter? Was he becoming too powerful to handle? Who knows? I honestly figured any administration -- Democrat or Republican -- would have given him a pass. I never imagined anyone would latch onto a Landis story and try to do something about it.

FrankBattle 

Lance will probably not be outed, per se. People will be left to draw their own conclusions on whether he doped. DoJ is after him for essentially drug peddling. He would still be able to claim innocence/sainthood on a technicality: "never tested positive."

Sad, really. If he wasn't such a bully, no one would have been the wiser.

pchopper

I've already stopped buying from Radio Shack














because those places are frickin' tiny, and they never have what I need

roadwarrior

Because their lives suck and they hate people that are successful.

hudsonbay

Nobody has anything on Lance despite the Herculean effort. Landis juiced up because his wife's parents were going broke in restaurant biz and he wanted treasure real bad. Then he got busted and now he's trying to make name for himself (book coming out?) going after Lance . LeMond is another obvious head case who resented being overshadowed a lot by Lance. No wonder people hate bikers with guys like Landis and LeMond harangue.

Jed19

Please stop embarrassing yourself with your half-baked reasoning.

dsh

I'm pretty sure that Alberto Contador shot JFK.

buddy

I her from Floyd Landis that Alphonse is next on the feds list for doping.

Golfster

Icons sell products. The corporate world sponsors icons for the return on investment. Scandal generates interest in the icon and the cycle (excuse the pun) continues. Although of a different magnitude, Nike still sponsors Tiger and Nike will continue to sponsor sports. Life goes on as will be the case with cycling.

merlinextraligh

The applicable privilege in this case is actually Lance's not Kristen's. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 501, questions of privilege are governed by common law.

Under the common law, there are 2 similar, but distinct marital privileges. One, the marital privilege, and two the marital communications privilege.

Under the marital privilege, Kristen cannot be compelled to testify against Lance, but it is her choice whether to do so. More importantly, that privilege does not survive the termination of the marriage.

Under the Marital Communication privilege, the private communications of a husband and wife are protected. This privilege rests in both spouses, and survives the marriage. So, Lance under the marital commuunications privilege can prevent Kristen from testifying as to their private communications.

Kristen can still be compelled to testify about things she observed that were not private marital communications. There are also certain other exceptions, such as joint criminal enterprise, such that if Kristen was part of the crime she might not be able to assert the Marital Communication privilege (but she would then have a 5th amendment privilege.

So the short answer is that Kristen likely can be forced to testify, but not to private comunications with Lance.

As an aside, its a lot more fun to answer your all's questions than doing actual paid legal work.

merlinextraligh

At least get the terminology correct.

We are cyclists, not bikers.