# UCI and Paul Kimmage



## BJH (20 Sep 2012)

The UCI never let's us down do they?

So we have former riders writing books, book publishers and umpteen newspapers that they could take through the legal process to defend their "good" (ha ha ) name, but instead they opt to go for Paul Kimmage???

Yet again they demonstrate by their actions exactly why many people believe them to be pathetic.


----------



## thom (20 Sep 2012)

To be fair to the UCI, they are consistent in their incompetence...


----------



## festival (20 Sep 2012)

They obviously see Kimmage as an easy target and by stamping on him it will frighten anyone else from pointing the finger. 
The UCI have lined up their cronys, er, witnesses but I hope Kimmage has the means and support to fight this and win.
Then the genie really will be out of the bottle.


----------



## thom (20 Sep 2012)

festival said:


> They obviously see Kimmage as an easy target and by stamping on him it will frighten anyone else from pointing the finger.
> The UCI have lined up their cronys, er, witnesses but I hope Kimmage has the means and support to fight this and win.
> Then the genie really will be out of the bottle.


Over $2,000 in the defence fund already.
Verbruggen and McQuaid have been suing people for years, kind of like a certain high profile ex-TdF winner.
The damages they're after are around 15,000 euros. They started the case before Tyler's book and USADA's charges so it's actually quite interesting to have the case because there is a certain danger that no charges regarding LA will make it to a courtroom and it would appear Kimmage would have much more ammunition to use in his defence.


----------



## johnr (21 Sep 2012)

It'll be an interesting case. One defence that would be interesting to run is that their reputation is so discredited that nothing Kimmage said could possibly damage it further.

At least it gives us all a chance to put our money where our mouths are by donating to the defence fund.


----------



## Sylvanus (21 Sep 2012)

Could you all try to sign the petition here:

"World Cycling Organization UCI: For president Pat McQuaid to resign and cycling to be cleaned up"

http://tinyurl.com/PatMusgGoPetition

and pass on to as many people as you know - tweet, facebook, the lot! Thanks


----------



## PpPete (21 Sep 2012)

Sylvanus said:


> Could you all try to sign the petition here:
> "World Cycling Organization UCI: For president Pat McQuaid to resign and cycling to be cleaned up"
> http://tinyurl.com/PatMusgGoPetition
> and pass on to as many people as you know - tweet, facebook, the lot! Thanks


 
Interesting idea.... but have a look round the change.org website that hosts this and you'll realise that it is funded by selling your contact details to "partner organisations" such as charities who want to tap you up for donations.

Don't get me wrong, I think Pat should be shot, never mind just resigning.... but I'm unconviced about signing this petition.


----------



## rich p (21 Sep 2012)

Verbruggen losing the plot here!! What a charlie.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/verbruggen-wont-take-legal-action-against-hamilton


----------



## Buddfox (21 Sep 2012)

PpPete said:


> Interesting idea.... but have a look round the change.org website that hosts this and you'll realise that it is funded by selling your contact details to "partner organisations" such as charities who want to tap you up for donations.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I think Pat should be shot, never mind just resigning.... but I'm unconviced about signing this petition.


 
Agreed - I wasn't giving out my address, post code etc.


----------



## Buddfox (21 Sep 2012)

rich p said:


> Verbruggen losing the plot here!! What a charlie.
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/verbruggen-wont-take-legal-action-against-hamilton


 
Just continues to underline the case for wholesale changes... it ain't half depressing, I tell you that.


----------



## CotterPin (21 Sep 2012)

rich p said:


> Verbruggen losing the plot here!! What a charlie.
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/verbruggen-wont-take-legal-action-against-hamilton


 
Can't deal with criticism:


> However Verbruggen, who served as UCI president from 1991 to 2005, added that, "We've had legal suits in the past with Dick Pound so* everyone that says we have put things under the table or not done our best is sued*. Simple. They can come to the court and prove their case. Simple like that."


----------



## just jim (22 Sep 2012)

The UCI surely must know who they've taken on. Or do they?

"Rough Ride", is widely held up as one of the most seminal cycling books. It tells the tale of Kimmage's journey as professional rider and his predicament and battles as he encountered a world and culture warped by doping. Asked if he had read the book, which was published roughly at the same time his presidency began, Verbruggen said:
"No. No. I have no need to read that. Why should I? I'm not in cycling any more. I've never read it. I don't read very much. I'm sorry to say but there's no need."

If it comes to court, I'm pretty sure Kimmage will be ready.
edit: Maybe not!

Asked what action he would take, he said he didn’t intend entertaining the claim. “I am reluctant to even put a stamp on an envelope and send it back, as that is going to cost me money…the cost of a stamp is actually too much money to waste on those people.”


----------



## Noodley (22 Sep 2012)

just jim said:


> Asked what action he would take, he said he didn’t intend entertaining the claim. “I am reluctant to even put a stamp on an envelope and send it back, as that is going to cost me money…the cost of a stamp is actually too much money to waste on those people.”


 
 Excellent response.


----------



## BJH (22 Sep 2012)

I see McQ as fallen back on another pathetic response when asked why he isn't suing the newspapers PK worked on 

Yes the you will have to ask my lawyers defence

Pathetic

Lets hope he does the sensible thing and realises that his days are numbered and opts to resign and in the meantime stop his nonsense legal action


----------



## Red Light (22 Sep 2012)

Noodley said:


> Excellent response.


Might be if he hadn't been subpoenaed in the last few days. Perhaps Julian is about to get some company in the Ecuadorian Embassy.


----------



## thom (22 Sep 2012)

'J'ai les moyens de vous faire un coureur positif quand je veux...'
Who said this ?
Paul Kimmage takes to twitter


----------



## Kiwiavenger (22 Sep 2012)

How long until Millar gets hauled up too

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/mobile/cycling/19686432


----------



## lukesdad (23 Sep 2012)

Not being familiar with the Swiss legal system. How does this work does Kimmage have to prove the allegation or the UCI dissprove it ?


----------



## Red Light (23 Sep 2012)

lukesdad said:


> Not being familiar with the Swiss legal system. How does this work does Kimmage have to prove the allegation or the UCI dissprove it ?


 
Kimmage has made the allegations. UCI is saying they are false. But primarily it is for Kimmage to show his allegations are true although one can expect UCI to be required to produce evidence to demonstrate they are not true. The fact he's had to be subpoenaed to appear will not help his case with the Court though.


----------



## thom (23 Sep 2012)

Michael Ashendon invoices the UCI in order to support Kimmage's defence fund !


----------



## rich p (23 Sep 2012)

thom said:


> Michael Ashendon invoices the UCI in order to support Kimmage's defence fund !


 Michael Ashenden impresses me every time I read his stuff but that is priceless!


----------



## Red Light (23 Sep 2012)

thom said:


> Michael Ashendon invoices the UCI in order to support Kimmage's defence fund !


 
No wonder they have problems. €130 an hour for expert work? That's about the same as the labour charge to service a car! The legal experts on these cases will be getting at least three times that.


----------



## Noodley (23 Sep 2012)

classic


----------



## thom (23 Sep 2012)

So Tyler Hamilton has decided to auction the entirety of his cycling memorabilia online and donate the proceeds to the Paul Kimmage defence fund !


----------



## Hont (24 Sep 2012)

Fund is over $18,000 now. Just donated. Not much, but every little helps.


----------



## rich p (24 Sep 2012)

I can't help wondering if this case won't make it to court given that the USADA evidence will be in the public domain by then and the UCI may have been shown to be corrupt anyway.


----------



## thom (24 Sep 2012)

rich p said:


> I can't help wondering if this case won't make it to court given that the USADA evidence will be in the public domain by then and the UCI may have been shown to be corrupt anyway.


Yeah, I think the UCI are to get the evidence soon and it will become public by the end of the year.
In the L'Equipe interview, Tygaart is super confident about the case, saying the effect on LA's reputation will be 30 times more destructive than what has been seen so far. You kind of think their allegations against the UCI are going to be backed up well too and Kimmage will be able to use that in his defence.


----------



## thom (28 Sep 2012)

Kimmage funds near $40 k and he sorts out legal representation


----------



## thom (1 Oct 2012)

UCI issue press release. Not much to it though.


----------



## thom (8 Oct 2012)

Mc Quaid's sister makes some comments :
All I'm asking for here is a bit of balance in the discussion. Paul Kimmage is being painted as a saint and Pat McQuaid as a villain. Neither portrayal is true. Paul Kimmage is a former doper. He lied to the fans and no doubt to his family and friends for years while he raced. He says he didn't take any of the hard stuff because he couldn't afford it... Perhaps that's like Lance Armstrong saying he didn't dope. We only have their word for it.


----------



## Buddfox (9 Oct 2012)

Oh deary me...


----------



## rich p (9 Oct 2012)

Commendable loyalty to the bloke who got her a job her brother but not very convincing! Kimmage has a vendetta - that word again that Armstrong uses every time someone points out that he. like Fat Pat and Hein have many questions to answer.
Deflection and obfuscation.


----------



## BJH (11 Oct 2012)

Bet Paul Kimmage is peeing himself with laughter now that the USAD documents are out.

Big Pat, don't make and even bigger Pr1ck out of yourself than you already are by continuing this nonsense.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (11 Oct 2012)

BJH said:


> Big Pat, don't make and even bigger Pr1ck out of yourself than you already are by continuing this nonsense.


 
If 'Big Pat' had a single shred of conscience, he'd be resigning now anyway.


----------



## Scoosh (11 Oct 2012)

No chance there, then ...


----------



## Paul_L (12 Oct 2012)

I personally hope the case continues. By then the UCI will be so discredited that any credible court will find in PK's favour that his year's of dedicated anti-doping journalism will finally bear fruit. You never know, the case may end up forcing McQuiad to resign, rather than him taking the easy option of bailing before hand.

I live in hope.


----------



## dellzeqq (12 Oct 2012)

Paul_L said:


> I personally hope the case continues. By then the UCI will be so discredited that any credible court will find in PK's favour that his year's of dedicated anti-doping journalism will finally bear fruit. You never know, the case may end up forcing McQuiad to resign, rather than him taking the easy option of bailing before hand.
> 
> *I live in hope*.


....but not in Switzerland.

And that's the point, surely. Why do these grasping, corrupt bodies hang out in Switzerland?


----------



## Bollo (12 Oct 2012)

dellzeqq said:


> ....but not in Switzerland.
> 
> And that's the point, surely. Why do these grasping, corrupt bodies hang out in Switzerland?


I believe it's the competitive tax regime and flexible banking industry that attracts.

Or it could be the scenery.

Nope, it's the tax and banking.


----------



## thom (12 Oct 2012)

dellzeqq said:


> Why do these grasping, corrupt bodies hang out in Switzerland?


Tax and corporate governance, lack thereof.
Chocolate and cheese, abundance thereof.


----------



## Bollo (12 Oct 2012)

While we're on to Switzerland, I've always enjoyed the idea that Sepp Blatter, Michelle Platini, Jacques Rogge and McQuaid all hang out in a big bunker underneath an Alp, like some sporty Marvel 'Emissaries of Evil'. Perhaps they could all star in the next Avengers film - there could even be a scene where Armstrong calls Paul Kimmage "a mewling quim"?

(it's in the film mods, honest! And it got a 12 cert!!!!)


----------



## Red Light (12 Oct 2012)

Bollo said:


> there could even be a scene where Armstrong calls Paul Kimmage "a mewling quim"?


 
You think da Silva doped too ?


----------



## Bollo (12 Oct 2012)

Red Light said:


> You think da Silva doped too ?


I don't know about that, but I hear he used to flap at crosses.


----------



## rich p (14 Oct 2012)

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/pound-uci-must-have-known-about-doping
This sort of stuff will make Kimmage's case easier to stick!


----------



## thom (14 Oct 2012)

Kimmage writes in the Oirish Independent. Has a go at Sean Kelly for finally acknowledging LA was up to no good but says McQuaid (his managers father) is doing a good job cleaning up the sport.


----------



## yello (15 Oct 2012)

I bet the UCI are beginning to wish they'd not subpoenaed Kimmage now. I reckon they're on a hiding to nothing.

Withdraw the case and it'll be seen by many as fearful of facing 'the truth'. To go ahead but loose (in the current climate, definitely a possibility) only endorses the corruption view. They'd trumpet a win certainly but it'll be seen as a hollow victory and doesn't put them anywhere they're not already. They'll only be able to say that a court says Kimmage can't say those things, not that they aren't true.

I'd love for Kimmage to do an 'Ace Face' from Quadrophenia though? That is, be found guilty then promptly whip out his cheque book and says he'll pay now!


----------



## Bollo (15 Oct 2012)

yello said:


> I bet the UCI are beginning to wish they'd not subpoenaed Kimmage now. I reckon they're on a hiding to nothing.
> 
> Withdraw the case and it'll be seen by many as fearful of facing 'the truth'. To go ahead but loose (in the current climate, definitely a possibility) only endorses the corruption view. They'd trumpet a win certainly but it'll be seen as a hollow victory and doesn't put them anywhere they're not already. They'll only be able to say that a court says Kimmage can't say those things, not that they aren't true.


 
Yep, I think their arrogance and hubris are very close finding them out. Of course, if the bang is big enough and the UCI do get found out, PK might have a case for counter-suing. Defamation, loss of earnings? I imagine something could stick.


----------



## User169 (15 Oct 2012)

"Une patate chaude pour l’UCI"

From Hein, via RMC:
“_I am happy that in the USADA report it says we never hid things under the table. It’s very important And I never said Armstrong never doped. What I said was that when Landis came along with his allegations, we’d never had a positive test for Armstrong_“

http://www.rmcsport.fr/editorial/308560/affaire-armstrong-verbruggen-l-uci-n-a-rien-cache/​


----------



## thom (15 Oct 2012)

Delftse Post said:


> "Une patate chaude pour l’UCI"
> 
> From Hein, via RMC:
> “_I am happy that in the USADA report it says we never hid things under the table. It’s very important And I never said Armstrong never doped. What I said was that when Landis came along with his allegations, we’d never had a positive test for Armstrong_“​​http://www.rmcsport.fr/editorial/308560/affaire-armstrong-verbruggen-l-uci-n-a-rien-cache/​


At the end of the day, it boils down to money for these characters. I wonder if Verbruggen is being paid by the UCI and how much he makes from related businesses.


----------



## Hont (15 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> Kimmage writes in the Oirish Independent. Has a go at Sean Kelly for finally acknowledging LA was up to no good


 
You know it's Sean Kelly when he opens with "Over the last number of months..."


----------



## Bollo (15 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> Kimmage writes in the Oirish Independent. Has a go at Sean Kelly for finally acknowledging LA was up to no good but says McQuaid (his managers father) is doing a good job cleaning up the sport.


Just read that. Calling Armstrong "Cancer Jesus" made snort tea.


----------



## beastie (15 Oct 2012)

Kimmage using the term "cancer" was the dummest thing he ever did. It alienated many, many people.


----------



## Bollo (15 Oct 2012)

beastie said:


> Kimmage using the term "cancer" was the dummest thing he ever did. It alienated many, many people.


I don't know Paul Kimmage beyond reading "Rough Ride" a couple of times and following a few of his articles when they pop up in the cycling and mainstream press, so the following might be utter mince for all I know. But I'll have a stab. 

I get the impression that PK isn't concerned with what people think of him. I also don't think he has a cause in the sense that there's an identified goal or any kind of long-term strategy to get there. He's not about making friends or consensus building. He's simply angry at all the lying and hypocrisy, sees no reason to hide it and has few inhibitions about expressing it. He's the old testament prophet railing against the sinfulness of the tribe, even as the tribe discuss how they might get the prophet to shut the **** up.

Personally, he's one of the few people in cycling that I'd genuinely like to meet. I wouldn't automatically expect to fall in love with the guy, but I get the idea that he'd be interesting company.


----------



## yello (15 Oct 2012)

KImmage is, love him or loathe him, needed. He's part of the system of checks and balances.


----------



## thom (15 Oct 2012)

yello said:


> KImmage is, love him or loathe him, needed. He's part of the system of checks and balances.


He seems to be the only confirmed chapter of this story that will end up in a court-room. And with a part that directly concerns the UCI's previous conduct, the irony that the UCI commenced it is delicious: Having done nothing to pursue the evidence against doping in pro-cycling, they effectively brought a corruption case against themselves.


----------



## beastie (15 Oct 2012)

Don't get me wrong. I like Kimmage's writing, and I hope he makes laughing stock of Hein,Pat and the UCI when he goes to court. Calling LA a "cancer" on the sport of cycling did not help his cause is all.


----------



## yello (15 Oct 2012)

Personally, I didn't think of it as anything other than an ill-chosen metaphor. I wasn't offended on behalf of others (not saying you're doing that btw beastie  )


----------



## thom (15 Oct 2012)

Yeah I can understand that word can cause offence to a wider audience, in particular an audience that believed the LA story.
In a sense that's why it was apt - the cancer awareness advocate part of LA is a facade, particularly in light of the evidence of the extent of the doping program (maybe not quite comparable in extent to the DDR's program but certainly more commercially motivated). From his personal position, perhaps Kimmage was foolhardy to sound off as he did. But myself I'm not personally offended by that language.


----------



## rich p (15 Oct 2012)

you have to remember that at the time Kimmage was a lone voice in a wilderness of journalists who toed the line. That press conference kept the 'Armstrong is a doper ' in the headlines when it was fading away. It may have offended a few but I'll forgive him that for his persistence and bravery to face Armstrong off, as he did in that room.


----------



## thom (15 Oct 2012)

rich p said:


> you have to remember that at the time Kimmage was a lone voice in a wilderness of journalists who toed the line.


toed/toad/towed ?


----------



## rich p (15 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> toed/toad/towed ?


 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toe_the_line


----------



## thom (15 Oct 2012)

rich p said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toe_the_line


well there you go - i always thought it was towed !


----------



## rich p (15 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> well there you go - i always thought it was towed !


 I thought you thought it was toad


----------



## yello (15 Oct 2012)

You calling Kimmage a toad? I'm offended.


----------



## thom (15 Oct 2012)

rich p said:


> I thought you thought it was toad



i just liked it as wordplay; the toads toed the line


----------



## thom (16 Oct 2012)

Stories about Nike being involved in UCI corruption - $500,000 payment at time of Verbruggen ?

USADA’s explosive “reasoned decision” has focused new attention on people who have claimed for years that the cyclist’s success was fueled by performance-enhancing drugs – critics who found themselves threatened by Armstrong and his lawyers and marginalized in the media. One of those critics is Kathy Lemond, the wife of American cyclist Greg Lemond, who testified under oath during a 2006 deposition that Nike paid former UCI president Hein Verbruggen $500,000 to cover up a positive drug test.​
​


----------



## johnr (16 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> Stories about Nike being involved in UCI corruption - $500,000 payment at time of Verbruggen ?
> 
> USADA’s explosive “reasoned decision” has focused new attention on people who have claimed for years that the cyclist’s success was fueled by performance-enhancing drugs – critics who found themselves threatened by Armstrong and his lawyers and marginalized in the media. One of those critics is Kathy Lemond, the wife of American cyclist Greg Lemond, who testified under oath during a 2006 deposition that Nike paid former UCI president Hein Verbruggen $500,000 to cover up a positive drug test.​​​


 Chapeau, Thom, you just keep coming up with the goods.


----------



## Kiwiavenger (16 Oct 2012)

I will definatly be following the case with great interest.

they have to continue with the action as to withdraw it would scream that they are trying to hide something, if it continues something will come out that may show them in a bad light.


----------



## thom (16 Oct 2012)

johnr said:


> Chapeau, Thom, you just keep coming up with the goods.


It's not me ! I just post links to other people's stories from twitter ;-)


----------



## Flying_Monkey (16 Oct 2012)

Should we just merge this with the Amrstrong thread? It's basically running on an entirely parrallel course now...


----------



## thom (16 Oct 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Should we just merge this with the Amrstrong thread? It's basically running on an entirely parrallel course now...


I prefer not myself - the LA thread is destined to be an undirected discussion, emotive and ill informed - perhaps there is much overlap and the info is related but I think the Kimmage case and information pertaining to UCI corruption is deserving and sufficiently different to the LA speculation that it is nice to have a filter from it.


----------



## rich p (16 Oct 2012)

... and certain posters don't bother with this thread either which is a welcome relief.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (16 Oct 2012)

rich p said:


> ... and certain posters don't bother with this thread either which is a welcome relief.


 
True, true.


----------



## thom (16 Oct 2012)

rich p said:


> ... and certain posters don't bother with this thread either which is a welcome relief.


characterised as those that object to the focus of USADA being solely on LA funnily enough


----------



## Flying_Monkey (16 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> characterised as those that object to the focus of USADA being solely on LA funnily enough


 
I know. I also invited those certain people to contribute to my how to reform the UCI thread and there has still been nothing...


----------



## thom (16 Oct 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> I know. I also invited those certain people to contribute to my how to reform the UCI thread and there has still been nothing...


indeed, a running joke really.
To be fair, the LA issue is just a seductive ballooning schmorgasbord of a speculation and misinformation, pickled with this cancer story. You can't force people to share your interpretation of the complexity on an internet forum and there's no glory in winning a debate about it on cyclechat !
Best they make up their own minds.


----------



## BJH (16 Oct 2012)

This should stay separate until they drop the case against him


----------



## tigger (16 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> Stories about Nike being involved in UCI corruption - $500,000 payment at time of Verbruggen ?
> 
> USADA’s explosive “reasoned decision” has focused new attention on people who have claimed for years that the cyclist’s success was fueled by performance-enhancing drugs – critics who found themselves threatened by Armstrong and his lawyers and marginalized in the media. One of those critics is Kathy Lemond, the wife of American cyclist Greg Lemond, who testified under oath during a 2006 deposition that Nike paid former UCI president Hein Verbruggen $500,000 to cover up a positive drug test.​
> ​



Another great link Thom, where do you find them? I must say even I find this hard to believe however. 

In terms of reforming the UCI, it's just such a massive question and can go in so many directions. So that's why I haven't personally commented on here. Really I have no idea where to start! In my experience of governing bodies in other sports, they are always a law unto themselves and are equally disliked by participants and spectators. I suppose the level of reform depends on the level of corruption. In the UCI's case, I think it may be beyond reform if the rumours we hear are true!

(Edit) Whoops, not sure this is in the right thread!


----------



## thom (16 Oct 2012)

tigger said:


> Another great link Thom, where do you find them? I must say even I find this hard to believe however.


Twitter has a lot going for it in terms of info sharing.
It is somewhat unlikely that this amounts to anything but it's just a question that needs to be asked and answered.

But we're doomed to Nike anyhow.

There are a few stories about Verbruggen floating around - see the Sky thread for a link to something from the 80's where Verbruggen implicates Sean Yates in an off-hand manner.

Paul Kimmage has been pretty quiet since the USADA files came out so I guess he's focusing on getting on top of the info. I would imagine that this particular Nike involvement would be queried if his case does go through in December. Edit: if PK feels there is credance to it
McQuaid has certainly got his hands full - perhaps his best way out of this case is if he just says the USADA stuff is getting such a high priority he has no time for it and walks away...


----------



## laurence (16 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> Paul Kimmage has been pretty quiet since the USADA files came out so I guess he's focusing on getting on top of the info. I would imagine that this particular Nike involvement would be queried if his case does go through in December.
> McQuaid has certainly got his hands full - perhaps his best way out of this case is if he just says the USADA stuff is getting such a high priority he has no time for it and walks away...


 
i wondered that. conveniently 'not have time' until it gets dropped by some time limit of the swizz court.


----------



## johnr (16 Oct 2012)

I'm not sure it's as simple as that. Courts tend to cut up rough if they think they're being used as a cheap publicity stunt. The UCI Two would have to acknowledge that what Kimmage was correct. That would have all sorts of implications for their futures and for the no-reform-needed agenda...

not that we'd care much, eh? Or even, if past history is anything to go by, if there was evidence that they had memory spans longer than a goldfish and could grasp that things they do and say today, may come back to haunt them tomorrow.


----------



## thom (16 Oct 2012)

johnr said:


> I'm not sure it's as simple as that. Courts tend to cut up rough if they think they're being used as a cheap publicity stunt. The UCI Two would have to acknowledge that what Kimmage was correct. That would have all sorts of implications for their futures and for the no-reform-needed agenda...
> 
> not that we'd care much, eh? Or even, if past history is anything to go by, if there was evidence that they had memory spans longer than a goldfish and could grasp that things they do and say today, may come back to haunt them tomorrow.


McQuaid could drop the case, in particular if there was an out of court settlement. He just needs a plausible story to go with doing it without a settlement to boast over.
But I'm speculating - no point in arguing.


----------



## philipbh (17 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> McQuaid could drop the case, in particular if there was an out of court settlement. He just needs a plausible story to go with doing it without a settlement to boast over.
> But I'm speculating - no point in arguing.


 
He might stand his ground - considering that the UCI are not the sole agency in overseeing / managing / reporting on the testing regime and any subsequent adverse analytical findings at the TdF

Any cover up seems to imply the French Sporting Ministry and / or its subsidiary agencies (LNDD for testing and CPLD for reporting) are complicit


----------



## Bollo (17 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> McQuaid could drop the case, in particular if there was an out of court settlement. He just needs a plausible story to go with doing it without a settlement to boast over.
> But I'm speculating - no point in arguing.


I can't see Kimmage going for the out-of-court settlement unless he runs out of cash to fight the case through. He's never shown himself one to compromise in the past.


----------



## thom (17 Oct 2012)

Bollo said:


> I can't see Kimmage going for the out-of-court settlement unless he runs out of cash to fight the case through. He's never shown himself one to compromise in the past.


McQuaid and Verbruggen initiated the proceedings. It's a civil claim. I would assume that irrespective of Kimmage, they can choose to drop the proceedings.
Edit: actually post pub, I don't think what i said would make sense - you're bound to be right @Bollo in that Kimmage must have a say. 
It wouldn't be a good legal system if you could bring random civil claims and just drop them before trial without penalty.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (17 Oct 2012)

Since the case is all about reputation, the more this goes on, the less McQuaid and, even more so, Verbruggen, are going to have any public reputation that is capable of being damaged.


----------



## rich p (17 Oct 2012)

The number of official sources who have accused the UCI of corruption and incompetence grows daily making their 'witch-hunt' of Kimmage ever more embarrassing.
Syvlia Schenk, Anne Gripper, Cycling Australia, WADA, USADA to name but 5...


----------



## rich p (17 Oct 2012)

...Tyler Hamilton...


----------



## rich p (17 Oct 2012)

...Floyd Landis...


----------



## rich p (17 Oct 2012)




----------



## thom (18 Oct 2012)

rich p said:


> The number of official sources who have accused the UCI of corruption and incompetence grows daily making their 'witch-hunt' of Kimmage ever more embarrassing.
> Syvlia Schenk, Anne Gripper, Cycling Australia, WADA, USADA to name but 5...


I suspect you can add all but 2 of the cyclechat population to that list too


----------



## johnr (18 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> I suspect you can add all but 2 of the cyclechat population to that list too


 Where do I sign?


----------



## thom (26 Oct 2012)

Initial signs are this case has been suspended !
Whoo-hoo !


----------



## kedab (26 Oct 2012)

ooh! innnnnnnteresting...beep beep beep...this UCI is reversing...


----------



## Noodley (26 Oct 2012)

...or realising it was a dumbfeck idea in the first place and that they were gonna get slaughtered


----------



## Kiwiavenger (26 Oct 2012)

Wahoo :happy dance: 

Had a feeling that at least this would happen following USADA's report


----------



## kedab (26 Oct 2012)

we'll see if mcquaid steps down in due course i guess but imho both he and verbruggen need to be removed from the sport entirely. clean sweep, big broom, give me a job on the uci, bobs you're uncle


----------



## rich p (27 Oct 2012)

rich p said:


> I can't help wondering if this case won't make it to court given that the USADA evidence will be in the public domain by then and the UCI may have been shown to be corrupt anyway.


 You heard it hear first!


----------



## Noodley (27 Oct 2012)

rich p said:


> You heard it hear first!


 
I was speaking with crax last week on the trip down to Welsh Wales and I put forward the idea that dropping the court action investigating LA et al was part of a plan to get the info into the public domain and hasten LAs downfall. If the court case had continued then it is doubtful that the detail of the case would have ever become public, and certainly would have taken years to become so if it did. By dropping the case then this has allowed USADA to take a different path, with less "proof", and a much quicker outcome. So maybe we should be praising the nobber who decided to drop the case?


----------



## rich p (27 Oct 2012)

Andre Birotte? That's certainly the result Noods but I suspect it wasn't planned that way.
Incidentally, my original quote was referring to the UCI v PK case.


----------



## Noodley (27 Oct 2012)

rich p said:


> I suspect it wasn't planned that way.


 
I reckon it might have been.


----------



## johnr (27 Oct 2012)

I said somewhere that courts don't like being used. Clearly in the Swiss case, I was wrong. I'm amazed they're allowed to suspend a case just in case an investigation finds out what they've been up to. If I was in Kimmage's shoes, I'd be telling my brief to get before the beaks demanding it either proceed forthwith or gets dropped with an award of costs and damages.


----------



## Orbytal (28 Oct 2012)

@johnr PK will not do that because he simply is unable to prove the comments. Has anyone got the proof of corruption? NO.

UCI realised that beating PK was just as bad as losing to him so suspended the legal proceedings.

THINK why did Sunday Times sack PK 2 weeks before the case landed? Because UCI advised them it was coming!

IF anyone here has unequivifical proof of corruption send it to PK and if not would YOU proceed?

I personally believe UCI need root and branch reform but I also accept that you dont make comments you cannot substantiate!


----------



## rich p (28 Oct 2012)

Orbytal said:


> @johnr PK will not do that because he simply is unable to prove the comments. Has anyone got the proof of corruption? NO.
> 
> UCI realised that beating PK was just as bad as losing to him so suspended the legal proceedings.
> 
> ...


Everyone and his brother has openly accused the UCI, PM and HV of being corrupt. No action was taken against any publication such as L'Equipe, or individuals such as Tyler H, Greg Lemond and many, many others. You should be asking yourself the question as to why these muppets are picking only on Kimmage.


----------



## beastie (28 Oct 2012)

Orbytal said:


> @johnr PK will not do that because he simply is unable to prove the comments. Has anyone got the proof of corruption? NO.
> 
> UCI realised that beating PK was just as bad as losing to him so suspended the legal proceedings.
> 
> ...




Kimmage was made redundant (along with many months others)before the UCI took him to court.


----------



## BJH (28 Oct 2012)

It does seem amazing that having been so self righteous about wanting to take PK to court to punish him for the "malicious" statements made, Big Pat can now decide to suspend his action.

I suspect this was never ever going to court in the first place, just another threat. They must have known this was always going to be on dodgy ground because in the current circumstances, PK will probably see a few more people be willing to come out and/or tell him some more information which would further embarrass the UCI.

Do the right thing Pat - accept that nothing can move on while you guys are still in control. If you love cycling, you know its the only option so save any last shred of your dignity and go.


----------



## Orbytal (28 Oct 2012)

Guys so it appears in a newspaper it’s true REALLY! Everyman and his dog are saying it well I am now convinced that if I get taken up for defamation I shall use that and the Judge will roll over.

How naive can you be? Have a look at Hillsborough Tragedy because everyman and their dog said it was not the Police but 23 years later they are being brought to task and justice and there are many more.

ANYONE want to put proof on the table? If you all believe it just prove it OR is it just something WE all believe is right but cannot prove. YES I also believe it is true but I am not a MUG who blindly follows comments I look to test what I see and read and make my own opinion.

I HOPE you can come up with it as it would help PK but don’t you think he would have published it by now if he had it?

UCI should invite him in for a chat and see how in the new reconciliation way forward it can be done out of court. 1 Federation doing this is wrong but what would we do if someone was hell bent to damage our business so it is also understandable.

@beastie is that just a convenient comment? It is clear why he went and recorded. Please post that he was a cost cutting exercise I would like to read that!

@richp are you aware that GL received Iron Injections in his 89 year at Giro after being dropped in basically all climbs by sprinters etc. but wow had these jabs and he flew to TDF and World setting a new road TT best average on the way. Zero to hero. How you feel about that from Anaemic to beating all the doping riders?


----------



## thom (1 Nov 2012)

The fight is strong in this one : Kimmage goes on the offensive.
LAUSANNE, Switzerland (VN) — Paul Kimmage has taken the offensive against the Union Cycliste Internationale, filing a complaint against Hein Verbruggen and Pat McQuaid “for slander/defamation, denigration and for strong suspicions of fraud.”

He tweets:

"I have lodged a criminal complaint against Hein Verbruggen and Pat McQuaid. I have initiated these proceedings not for myself - this is not about Paul Kimmage, but on behalf of the whistle blowers - Stephen Swart, Frankie Andreu, Floyd Landis, Christophe Bassons, Nicolas Aubier, Gilles Delion, Graeme Obree and every other cyclist who stood up for truth and the sport they loved and were dismissed as "cowards" and "scumbags" by Verbruggen and McQuaid.


----------



## Noodley (1 Nov 2012)

Go Paul..!!!


----------



## just jim (1 Nov 2012)

So he's not donating the money to the UCI for new testing equipment?


----------



## Buddfox (1 Nov 2012)

I was hoping he might have done this - based on the public info, I had thought if I'd been his shoes I'd have done the same. (And if I'd have donated money to his fund I'd have written to him asking him to use the money donated to go on the offensive)

Good luck to him!


----------



## Russell Allen (1 Nov 2012)

It's nice to know my $10.00 is going to a good cause

Russell


----------



## Archie (1 Nov 2012)

Copy of the press release here.


----------



## johnr (2 Nov 2012)

thom said:


> The fight is strong in this one : Kimmage goes on the offensive.
> LAUSANNE, Switzerland (VN) — Paul Kimmage has taken the offensive against the Union Cycliste Internationale, filing a complaint against Hein Verbruggen and Pat McQuaid “for slander/defamation, denigration and for strong suspicions of fraud.”
> 
> He tweets:
> ...


 All I can say is... yipee!


----------



## johnr (2 Nov 2012)

thom said:


> The fight is strong in this one : Kimmage goes on the offensive.
> LAUSANNE, Switzerland (VN) — Paul Kimmage has taken the offensive against the Union Cycliste Internationale, filing a complaint against Hein Verbruggen and Pat McQuaid “for slander/defamation, denigration and for strong suspicions of fraud.”
> 
> He tweets:
> ...


 
I once spent 8 hours memorising 'io o il mal di gola' (I have got a sore throat) from a phrase book. I was in Bari, waiting for a ferry. That's all the Italian I know, but thanks for the post. 

When the pharmacy opened, I said, 'Io o il...', before the assistant said, ... il mal di gola?' 

My spoken Italian is obviously impeccable.


----------



## slowmotion (2 Nov 2012)

Noodley said:


> Go Paul..!!!


Top man. Here he was saying it when it wasn't particularly fashionable..

http://nos.nl/video/210777-lance-armstrong-gebruikte-doping.html


----------



## Bollo (2 Nov 2012)

Wait a goddam pickin' minute here! It's the PK Defense (sic) Fund, not the Offence Fund. I'm not completely comfortable with a fund set up to make sure PK has some financial protection being used for a clearly different purpose. Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see Pat and Hein feel the heat of a little court time and I'm sure most of the people who donated would happily see their money used to get them there. I'm worried for two reasons, the fund might still be needed for defence if Pat and Hein's decide to 'unsuspend' their action and critics of PK might seize on any perceived misuse of the fund as evidence of his general perfidy, moral bankruptcy etc.


----------



## 007fair (2 Nov 2012)

Bollo said:


> Wait a goddam *cotton* pickin' minute here! It's the PK Defense (sic) Fund, not the Offence Fund. I'm not completely comfortable with a fund set up to make sure PK has some financial protection being used for a clearly different purpose. Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see Pat and Hein feel the heat of a little court time and I'm sure most of the people who donated would happily see their money used to get them there. I'm worried for two reasons, the fund might still be needed for defence if Pat and Hein's decide to 'unsuspend' their action and critics of PK might seize on any perceived misuse of the fund as evidence of his general perfidy, moral bankruptcy etc.


UCI just deciding to bow out is not on. What else can PK do ? Taking PK to court was just bravado because they needed to be seen to be reacting.. but in truth the last thing UCI want is a revealing court case. If PK does not do it who will ?


----------



## thom (2 Nov 2012)

Bollo said:


> Wait a goddam pickin' minute here! It's the PK Defense (sic) Fund, not the Offence Fund.


Monies in the defence fund have not yet been tapped and Kimmage will not access the fund without donor consent for the new case against Verbruggen and McQuaid.


----------



## 007fair (2 Nov 2012)

thom said:


> Monies in the defence fund have not yet been tapped and Kimmage will not access the fund without donor consent for the new case against Verbruggen and McQuaid.


You are the Zen Buddhist Ninja of Interweb Info!


----------



## Bollo (2 Nov 2012)

thom said:


> Monies in the defence fund have not yet been tapped and Kimmage will not access the fund without donor consent for the new case against Verbruggen and McQuaid.


I imagine most of the donors will be more than keen.

I'm off to pick some cotton


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (2 Nov 2012)

Bollo said:


> I imagine most of the donors will be more than keen.


I didn't put any money into the defence fund but I'd be far happier to put money into the prosecution fund.


----------



## fozy tornip (2 Nov 2012)

Would that there were some sort of badge or coloured silicon bracelet thingummy imprinted with a catchy slogan like, say, 'Rough Ride' or 'Paniagua' that you could buy and wear to show your support of Paul Kimmage and clean cycling.....


----------



## Orbytal (3 Nov 2012)

PK I believe is acting with impulse and not foresight!

It looks like the weight of money pledged for him is making him spend it. I hope it is not his downfall but I fear it is!


----------



## Russell Allen (3 Nov 2012)

yawn


----------



## just jim (3 Nov 2012)

fozy tornip said:


> Would that there were some sort of badge or coloured silicon bracelet thingummy imprinted with a catchy slogan like, say, 'Rough Ride' or 'Paniagua' that you could buy and wear to show your support of Paul Kimmage and clean cycling.....


 
"terminare il silenzio!"
"cessare omerta!"


----------



## ChrisBailey (3 Nov 2012)

fozy tornip said:


> Would that there were some sort of badge or coloured silicon bracelet thingummy imprinted with a catchy slogan like, say, 'Rough Ride' or 'Paniagua' that you could buy and wear to show your support of Paul Kimmage and clean cycling.....


 
I would contribute to the defense fund (as I did) and trust in PK, the size of the fund is one of the major drivers here.

I am also confident that if he needs to use that existing defense fund to support his new campaign he will seek approval from existing donors.


----------



## thom (4 Nov 2012)

Kimmage writes about his motivation for the legal fights in the Irish Independent


----------



## Bollo (5 Nov 2012)

thom said:


> Kimmage writes about his motivation for the legal fights in the Irish Independent


An interesting read and full of Kimmage's best Sturm und Drang. 

Just to clarify my understanding, is Kimmage's counter-case against Pat 'n Hein based on their "liars, cowards and scumbags" quote and similar utterances? Out of this three tags, I imagine only the first could be the subject of court action as the other two might be insulting, but they're not really provable or disprovable in a legal sense. Where I start to get hazy is what exactly Pat 'n Hein were referring to when they called PK a 'liar'? If they were addressing PK's original accusations against Lance, then PK has been shown to be essentially telling the truth, so game on - see you in 'tribunal'. If they're answering the charges of corruption then I think PK is on much shakier ground. Much as many people, me included, believe that the UCI are up to their necks, there's no smoking gun been found yet


----------



## Orbytal (6 Nov 2012)

Bollo said:


> An interesting read and full of Kimmage's best Sturm und Drang.
> 
> Just to clarify my understanding, is Kimmage's counter-case against Pat 'n Hein based on their "liars, cowards and scumbags" quote and similar utterances? Out of this three tags, I imagine only the first could be the subject of court action as the other two might be insulting, but they're not really provable or disprovable in a legal sense. Where I start to get hazy is what exactly Pat 'n Hein were referring to when they called PK a 'liar'? If they were addressing PK's original accusations against Lance, then PK has been shown to be essentially telling the truth, so game on - see you in 'tribunal'. If they're answering the charges of corruption then I think PK is on much shakier ground. Much as many people, me included, believe that the UCI are up to their necks, there's no smoking gun been found yet


 
I would beg to differ based on FL ruling in a Swiss Court! Whilst we can all be astounded that a Judge agreed to record it happened so we shall hope to see Part 2 coming with more farce to amuse us with.


----------



## Bollo (7 Nov 2012)

OK - went away and did a bit of reading. It seems Kimmage's deposition is 28 pages long, although how much of that is legalise fluff I don't know. If the summaries in the press are to be trusted, PK is after Pat 'n Hein for "slander/defamation, denigration and strong suspicions of fraud".
Personally, I think PK has shot his load too soon. He's got as good a case as any for "Slander, defamation and denigration", but that's just tit-for-tat. Even if he wins on those terms, it doesn't put Pat 'n Hein in a position where they're forced to resign. The "suspicions of fraud" is interesting and I'd love to see the full wording on that. Can you really accuse someone of being 'suspected' of something? Either the case is that Pat 'n Hein have committed fraud or that they haven't. I would have thought that the wording as it's been reported is meaningless in legal terms. My guess is that it's been shoehorned in to get the headlines - "McQuaid! Verbruggen! Court! Fraud!" for what amounts to a legal case based on name-calling.
Beyond the sweet taste of revenge I can only think that PK is hoping a court case will flush out conclusive evidence of fraud, but it's a high-stakes gamble. If the fraud tag doesn't stick, Pat 'n Hein could use it in a similar manner to Armstrong's "most tested athlete" defence, but in this case it'd be "most sued president".


----------



## oldroadman (7 Nov 2012)

It seems to me that putting Pat and Hein in the same group is a mistake - I think if Hein went then the sport would be better for it. If Pat went then it would leave a gap at the top of UCI, and that's likely to be filled by someone from eastern europe. Which is where any chance of transparency could well end. It's just a case of being careful what you wish for, frying pans and fires, and all that?


----------



## Alun (7 Nov 2012)

I wonder if those who have contributed to Kimmages defence fund, would be AS willing to allow it to be used for a defamation case rather than a (more serious) fraud case.


----------



## Bollo (7 Nov 2012)

oldroadman said:


> It seems to me that putting Pat and Hein in the same group is a mistake - I think if Hein went then the sport would be better for it. If Pat went then it would leave a gap at the top of UCI, and that's likely to be filled by someone from eastern europe. Which is where any chance of transparency could well end. It's just a case of being careful what you wish for, frying pans and fires, and all that?


It's certainly true that change won't necessarily be change for the better. Probably the biggest mistake that PQ has made is not putting enough distance between himself and Verbruggen.


----------



## Bollo (7 Nov 2012)

Alun said:


> I wonder if those who have contributed to Kimmages defence fund, would be AS willing to allow it to be used for a defamation case rather than a (more serious) fraud case.


 
Linky here!
UCI and Paul Kimmage Post #118


----------



## Alun (7 Nov 2012)

Bollo said:


> Linky here!
> UCI and Paul Kimmage Post #118


 Yes I've read that, but it doesn't address whether people might rather their money be used for a fraud action than just a defamation one.


----------



## Bollo (7 Nov 2012)

Alun said:


> Yes I've read that, but it doesn't address whether people might rather their money be used for a fraud action than just a defamation one.


OK, sorry. Got you now!

As it stands, I think PK's case IS only a defamation case. The fact that it mentions fraud is a MacGuffin. I don't know if fraud can be raised as a civil action - surely it's a criminal offence - but I'm sure there are lawyers on here who'll put me straight.


----------



## thom (1 Feb 2013)

fwiw, Rouleur have given over 32 pages to a PK interview with Herbie Sykes in issue 36


----------



## thom (1 May 2013)

You could not make it up !
Cyclismas' PKD funds go missing !


----------



## Crackle (1 May 2013)

thom said:


> You could not make it up !
> Cyclismas' PKD funds go missing !


Sadly, you could.

It did vaguely occur to me that this fund could be a double edged sword but corruption in the anti-corruption fund is just a tadge, smirk inducing, ironic.


----------

