Armstrong charged and banned

[mickle]

... the new evidence ... is being held secret by USADA.

Really? 'Held secret'? Lancey boy was about to be given the opportunity to counter their evidence, but at the very moment he had to face it he threw in the towel.

I suspect, not that I have any legal training or anything, that the USADA's evidence againsts Armstrong will remain out of the public domain until bodies such as the UCI have been given a chance to go through it. That's not secrecy, that's process.

I was wondering what was eating you. This post, more than any other, tells us what underpins your weird stance - you really do seem to believe that Armstrong is the victim of some great conspiracy.

 

[Red Light]

Yes Red Light, I think I've worked out your opinion on this now. You've been consistent and said pretty much the same thing in every post. Your point has been noted. Can we move on?

Just responding to Noodley's direct question - unless you have a problem with that.

 

[Red Light]

Really? 'Held secret'? Lancey boy was about to be given the opportunity to counter their evidence, but at the very moment he had to face it he threw in the towel.

I suspect, not that I have any legal training or anything, that the USADA's evidence againsts Armstrong will remain out of the public domain until bodies such as the UCI have been given a chance to go through it. That's not secrecy, that's process.

I was wondering what was eating you. This post, more than any other, tells us what underpins your weird stance - you really do seem to believe that Armstrong is the victim of some great conspiracy.

The evidence is being held secret by USADA although the latest is that they will publish it in a couple of weeks. The deal for Armstrong was decide to contest and then we will show you the evidence so not even Armstrong has seen it. Do you have a problem with waiting a few weeks to see it rather than jumping to conclusions?

 

[yello]

That would explain Tygart's comments about letting him keep five of his titles - they've presented Lance with damning evidence relating to 2004 and 2005 and said we'll leave it at that if you help us catch the even bigger fish...

Broadly speaking, I agree with your speculation. I don't think this was ever a 'get Lance at all costs' witch hunt. I think the intention was broader and related more to the doctors and DSs still in the sport, and more broadly still about eradicating a doping ethos. I also think Armstrong was offered the chance to be a part of that broader intention but, as we know, he declined.

 

[mickle]

The evidence is being held secret by USADA although the latest is that they will publish it in a couple of weeks. The deal for Armstrong was decide to contest and then we will show you the evidence so not even Armstrong has seen it. Do you have a problem with waiting a few weeks to see it rather than jumping to conclusions?

But I'm not jumping to any conclusions. Lance Armstrong, in case you have forgotten, turned and walked away rather than see the evidence against him. All anyone can say is that (especially given his previous rabid enthusiasm for attacking anyone who mentioned PEDs and him in the same sentence) that it all looks deeply suspicious. I'm pretty sure that's all anyone is saying. Your terminolgy, esp. use of the word 'secret', is putting a conspiratorial spin on events which isn't warranted.

 

[yello]

"Held secret" is spin. There's a procedure being followed, that's all. There are 2 issues as I recall; a requirement to notify UCI, and a requirement to disclose evidence to defendants. Once the hearing date(s) are announced for Bruyneel and Marti then (I believe) USADA have 5 days to disclose the evidence to them.... or it might be no later than 5 days before the hearing.... can't remember which. Whatever it is, I think USADA will disclose the evidence in due course.

Speaking personally, I wish USADA would publish their report too (if only to satisfy Red Light!), it might help dampen down a great deal of speculation, either one way or the other. But I understand that official process is not governed by what individuals might want.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Some of the evidence certainly isn't secret if you're a TV journalist working for Stade 2 in France. USADA giving evidence to a French TV station at the same time as sending the same evidence to UCI (apparently)?

At best sharp practise surely, at worse a flagrant attempt to bully the UCI into ratifying USADA's asinine "We've striped his titles" claim.

They are all cheats, one way or another, it seems, even the 'good' guys....

 

[thom]

"We've striped his titles"

Zebra stripes ? Could be quite a nice effect...

 

[smutchin]

Let's wait and see, eh? The leak reported in the Dutch press about former teammates testifying remains nothing more than a rumour at the moment. We don't know if there's any truth in this latest story, nor what its source might be. It's certainly not an official announcement by USADA.

d.

 

[Crackle]

Personally, I'm not getting too worked up about those test results until I hear some kind of official comment. Tbh, I didn't see the programme (on French tele) and I find the reports a little vague. So I'll worry about who can test what, and when, with or without consent, once we've worked out what's being talked about here.

This for me but I thought it was definitely worth linking to as it would put the top hat on everything if confirmed.

 

[yello]

I thought it was definitely worth linking to as it would put the top hat on everything if confirmed.

Agreed, absolutely. It's totally within the context of this thread. I'm not shooting the messenger!

I really ought have a look at L'Equipe to see how they're reporting it.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Carry on, Greg's not dyslexic.

Perhaps not. But the note from my doctor does confirm [sp]brian[/sp] damage.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Bollocks, another game of top trumps lost.

Well, if one will bring a knife to the gun fight......

 

[rich p]

This 'stripping of titles' is another irrelevance. There are bigger issues than who won the tour in 2003.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

This 'stripping of titles' is another irrelevance. There are bigger issues than who won the tour in 2003.

USADA don't agree with you Rich. I do, but there's scant consolation for either of us in that.