Armstrong charged and banned

[Chuffy]

Life time bans announced for Dr. Luis Garcia del Moral, Dr. Michele Ferrari and Jose “Pepe” Martín

http://www.usada.org/media/sanction-usps7102012

3 down then....

USADA ROCK!!

 

[yello]

USADA didn't hang around then did they then. The 3 presumably advised no intention to contest (or simply did not respond) so USADA gave them with the maximum sanction.

Violations are;

(1) Possession of prohibited substances and/or methods including EPO, blood transfusions and related equipment (such as needles, blood bags, storage containers and other transfusion equipment and blood parameters measuring devices), testosterone, hGH, corticosteroids, and masking agents.

(2) Trafficking of EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone, hGH, corticosteroids and masking agents.

(3) Administration and/or attempted administration of EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone, hGH, corticosteroids, and masking agents.

(4) Assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, covering up and other complicity involving one or more anti-doping rule violations and/or attempted anti-doping rule violations.

I bet Armstrong is really crapping himself now.

 

[User169]

It is, but as far as I understand it the IOC banned list seems to have been the de-facto banned list for sport generally, hence WADA taking it over. Pretty sure UCI would take their lead from that list, especially as cycling seems to have been an early adopter of our friend Edgar.

Delftse Post - can you source that 1990 reference? Would be interested to see if the 1992 date is innacurate.

Chuffy - see para headed "New Challenges"...

http://www.wada-ama.org/en/About-WADA/History/A-Brief-History-of-Anti-Doping/

 

[yello]

Interesting, from the announcement....

The other respondents in this case have either asked for and been granted a five-day extension to complete their response, or have requested to move forward with an arbitration hearing where all evidence will be presented, witness testimony will be given under oath, and an independent group of arbitrators will ultimately decide the outcome of the case.

So I'm guessing the sanctioned 3 did not respond. I don't now how to read that "or" though. Do I take from that someone has requested a hearing? We know Armstrong has asked for, and been given, the extension.

 

[Alun]

USADA seem to have given LA another 5 days, but Sam Sparks has given him 20 days to refile his claim at the District Court. I can't see the arbitration panel sitting whilst there is still a (slim) chance that the District Court might rule against them.

 

[yello]

Or if Armstrong refiles pronto, Sparks will deliver his judgement by the 14th.

USADA won't wait. And Armstrong wants to stop the hearing.

 

[User169]

Sam Sparks once began an order..

"When the undersigned accepted the appointment from the President of the United States of the position now held, he was ready to face the daily practice of law in federal courts with presumably competent lawyers. No one warned the undersigned that in many instances his responsibility would be the same as a person who supervised kindergarten."

 

[User169]

Another good benchslap from Sparks..

"[T]he Court is forced to conclude Allan E. Parker, Jr., the attorney whose signature appears on this motion, is anything but competent. A competent attorney would not have filed this motion in the first place; if he did, he certainly would not have attached exhibits that are both highly prejudicial and legally irrelevant; and if he foolishly did both things, he surely would not be so unprofessional as to file such exhibits unsealed. A competent attorney who did those things would be deliberately disrespecting this Court and knowingly shirking his professional responsibilities, offenses for which he would be lucky to retain his bar card, much less an intact bank balance"

 

[User169]

Another classic here...

http://cache.abovethelaw.com/uploads/2011/08/Sam-Sparks-kindergarteners-order.pdf

 

[raindog]

So Ferrari, Del Moral and Marti have accepted the charges of supplying and administering drugs to US Postal, so it's difficult to see how LA and JB can continue to contest and deny. Or am I missing something?

"USADA CEO Travis Tygart confirmed to Cyclingnews that Ferrari, Del Moral and Marti accepted their lifetime bans. "The respondents chose not to waste resources by moving forward with the arbitration process, which would only reveal what they already know to be the truth of their doping activity."

 

[yello]

I don't post conjecture from bods of the 'The Clinic' as a rule but this one did grab my attention (and, no, it's not the one about part of the 110 pages - or whatever is was - containing the information that Armstrong was fourth in a swimming race when he was 15 or whatever )

No, this one is legally interesting. Apparently, there is no personal statement from Armstrong in all of that 110 (or whatever) pages. Odd given he is the one filing it. It only contains statements from Armstrong's lawyers. So? We'll if Armstrong puts his name to a false statement on an official court document then he can be done for perjury! It was also suggested that without a personal statement, then judge cannot decide the matter. Armstrong is already under warning from Sparks that if he messes the court around again he is likely to face punishment. He really is between the rock and hard place, running out of options.

 

[Buddfox]

Exactly what have they been banned from? I can't figure it out from the links... I'm probably being slow. Is it all professional sport worldwide? Or just in the US? Or just cycling?

 

[yello]

So Ferrari, Del Moral and Marti have accepted the charges of supplying and administering drugs to US Postal, so it's difficult to see how LA and JB can continue to contest and deny. Or am I missing something?

I guess they have the right to individually contest the evidence if they so wish. Until they notify USADA of their intention (and do I guess Bruyneel has elected to contest???) then USADA do nothing. The 9th passed for the sanctioned 3 so USADA acted.

I'm trying not to read into that that it's going to be the same decision for Bruyneel and Armstrong should they not contest, but it's hard to see it any other way.

 

[Alun]

I don't post conjecture from bods of the 'The Clinic' as a rule but this one did grab my attention (and, no, it's not the one about part of the 110 pages - or whatever is was - containing the information that Armstrong was fourth in a swimming race when he was 15 or whatever )

No, this one is legally interesting. Apparently, there is no personal statement from Armstrong in all of that 110 (or whatever) pages. Odd given he is the one filing it. It only contains statements from Armstrong's lawyers. So? We'll if Armstrong puts his name to a false statement on an official court document then he can be done for perjury! It was also suggested that without a personal statement, then judge cannot decide the matter. Armstrong is already under warning from Sparks that if he messes the court around again he is likely to face punishment. He really is between the rock and hard place, running out of options.

Does there have to be a statement from LA himself, has Judge Sparks said so? Seems to me he would have mentioned it, if it was required.

 

[yello]

Exactly what have they been banned from?

It is a really good question! No idea in truth but I'd guess we can assume they cannot perform a role as a sports or team doctor to any USADA affiliated sport in the USA. Beyond that, no idea!

I don't know if that ban automatically extends worldwide courtesy of WADA affiliation, or whether it has to be ratified by WADA first. Equally, and in terms of cycling, I don't know if UCI have also (or can also) ban them, or it would necessarily follow from a WADA ban. My guess (and it is a guess) is that whilst each separate body has to formally make the judgement for themselves that is effectively a rubber stamping of the USADA decision.

One of the things I am really interested to see is just how UCI respond should Armstrong be sanctioned.