albion
Guest
That is my same thought but he never has been, chinese whispers and all that.
Armstrong charged and banned
- Thread starter yello
- Start date
- Status
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
That is my same thought but he never has been, chinese whispers and all that.
just jim
Guest
I'm bound to say that Lance was at the tiller of being treated differently - a quite thorough form of expediency. As a result he has a longer distance to fall than others.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jul/09/lance-armstrong-lawsuit-doping-agency
Already dismissed, though he can re-file
Already dismissed, though he can re-file
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
Just in case you weren't aware, the USADA proceedings aren't a criminal case.
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
But, given the size and expense of his legal team and the various precedents he had to know that he'd be handed his arse on a plate by the judge. So why bother, other than to bellow more stupid and demonstrably wrong talking points out to his idiot fans?
But, given the size and expense of his legal team and the various precedents he had to know that he'd be handed his arse on a plate by the judge. So why bother, other than to bellow more stupid and demonstrably wrong talking points out to his idiot fans?
Well, his legal teams pleadings have not gone down well with the judge....
Armstrong's complaint is far from short, spanning eighty pages and containing 261 numbered paragraphs, many of which have multiple subparts. Worse, the bulk of these paragraphs contain "allegations" that are wholly irrelevant to Armstrong's claimsand which, the Court must presume, were included solely to increase media coverage of this case, and to incite public opinion against Defendants. See, e.g., Compl. [#1] ¶ 10 ("USADA's kangaroo court proceeding would violate due process even if USADA had jurisdiction to pursue its charges against Mr. Armstrong.").Fn 1 Indeed, vast swaths of the complaint could be removed entirely, and most of the remaining paragraphs substantially reduced, without the loss of any legally relevant information.
Nor are Armstrong's claims "plain": although his causes of action are, thankfully, clearly enumerated, the excessive preceding rhetoric makes it difficult to relate them to any particular factual support. This Court is not inclined to indulge Armstrong's desire for publicity, self-aggrandizement, or vilification of Defendants, by sifting through eighty mostly unnecessary pages in search of the few kernels of factual material relevant to his claims.
Accordingly, Armstrong's complaint, and his accompanying motion, are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court grants leave to amend, provided Armstrong can limit his pleadings to: (1) the basis for this Court's jurisdiction; (2) the legal claims he is asserting; (3) against which Defendants each claim is being made; (4) the factual allegations supporting each claim; (5) a brief statement of why such facts give rise to the claim; (6) a statement of the relief sought; and (7) why his claims entitle him to such relief.Fn 2. Armstrong is advised, in the strongest possible terms, and on pain of Rule 11 sanctions, to omit any improper argument, rhetoric, or irrelevant material from his future pleadings.
Part of the judges dismissal notice/order. I seriously doubt he can come up anything which will comply with submitting new pleadings under the guidance given i.e facts
Link to pdf http://liveupdateguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Armstrong-TRO-dismissal.pdf
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
Oh, comedy gold!!!! That's a huge kick in the bollock.
Admin - we're going to need a bigger LOL.
mangaman
Guest
I can't see that Red Light.
There seems to be a mixed view.
Personally I think he has demonstrated a continuous campaign against anti-dopers. Most especially Bassons who he effectively destroyed as a rider after Bassons was fingered by eveyone as the only clean rider on the Festina team.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe_Bassons.
To me, his actions against Bassons (especially as Armstrong,s blood from 1999 showed up positive for EPO) were the most despicable moment of a pretty unsavoury career. He effectively forced Bassons out for not taking EPO and talking about it.
His actions against Simeoni were different - Simeoni admitted Dr Ferrari had doped him with EPO, and Armstrong was out to humiliate him. Why would he do that as Ferrari was still his Dr if he were clean?
His urine from 1999 was positive for EPO was positive although too late to disqualify him
"On August 23, 2005, L'Équipe, a major French daily sports newspaper, reported on its front page under the headline "le mensonge Armstrong" ("The Armstrong Lie") that 6 urine samples taken from the cyclist during the prologue and five stages of the 1999 Tour de France, frozen and stored since at "Laboratoire national de dépistage du dopage de Châtenay-Malabry" (LNDD), had tested positive for erythropoietin (EPO) in recent retesting conducted as part of a research project into EPO testing methods"
He had the option to retest these samples but refused.
He "donated" $125000 to WADA (as you do) for no apparant reason (other to cover up positive tests.)
http://www.playthegame.org/news/det...over-armstrong-donations-to-the-uci-4933.html
Everyone's innocent until proven guilty in a criminal case.
Sometimes it's not that easy in non-criminal cases, although Armstrong has fought consistently against anti-doping campaigners, tested positive for EPO before it was officially banned and generally threatened and paid people off.
To me he's an immoral solipsist and I have zero respect for him whether he will or won't be found guilty.
There seems to be a mixed view.
Personally I think he has demonstrated a continuous campaign against anti-dopers. Most especially Bassons who he effectively destroyed as a rider after Bassons was fingered by eveyone as the only clean rider on the Festina team.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe_Bassons.
To me, his actions against Bassons (especially as Armstrong,s blood from 1999 showed up positive for EPO) were the most despicable moment of a pretty unsavoury career. He effectively forced Bassons out for not taking EPO and talking about it.
His actions against Simeoni were different - Simeoni admitted Dr Ferrari had doped him with EPO, and Armstrong was out to humiliate him. Why would he do that as Ferrari was still his Dr if he were clean?
His urine from 1999 was positive for EPO was positive although too late to disqualify him
"On August 23, 2005, L'Équipe, a major French daily sports newspaper, reported on its front page under the headline "le mensonge Armstrong" ("The Armstrong Lie") that 6 urine samples taken from the cyclist during the prologue and five stages of the 1999 Tour de France, frozen and stored since at "Laboratoire national de dépistage du dopage de Châtenay-Malabry" (LNDD), had tested positive for erythropoietin (EPO) in recent retesting conducted as part of a research project into EPO testing methods"
He had the option to retest these samples but refused.
He "donated" $125000 to WADA (as you do) for no apparant reason (other to cover up positive tests.)
http://www.playthegame.org/news/det...over-armstrong-donations-to-the-uci-4933.html
Everyone's innocent until proven guilty in a criminal case.
Sometimes it's not that easy in non-criminal cases, although Armstrong has fought consistently against anti-doping campaigners, tested positive for EPO before it was officially banned and generally threatened and paid people off.
To me he's an immoral solipsist and I have zero respect for him whether he will or won't be found guilty.
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
Banned since the early 90s, well before LA's retrospective positive. Oddly enough, Phil Liggett made the same 'mistake' in a recent interview. Funny that...
Yes, the criminal case was dropped by the FBI but that hasn't stopped the local lynch mob's guilty until proven innocent and even then still guilty stance.
Funny that the World Anti Doping Agency cannot say when it was banned other than sometime in the early '90's. You would have thought they would have known which year it was.
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
Hmmmm, it was 'dropped' at the behest of one man, Andre Birotte Jr. Apparently even the investigators (Novitsky and co) were taken aback. And, as the case never went the distance, it can be reactivated at any point and if USADA get their man (and they will) it would be slightly odd if the Fed case wasn't reopened. Also, and I appreciate that this is a subtlety that many have missed, the federal case was specifically into money laundering and drug trafficking. The Feds don't have a primary interest in doping as that alone is not a criminal offence.
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
Which bit of 'before 1999' do you not understand?
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
Presumably you include Travis Tygart in the 'local lynch mob'?
- Status
