Prosecutors close Lance Armstrong inquiry with no charges

[Wyatt Earp]

Frankie A is/was a doper, he is just suurtiet because he could not achieve greatness...... Think of others who can be added to the list. Landis, Squeeler LeMond etc etc

Man, I love that term

[ti guy]

Go Lance - te salutant!

[TNT1]

Armstrong investigation was a complicated PR case, says Roberts

 

By:

Daniel Benson

Published:

February 5, 10:21,

Updated:

February 5, 10:22

 

Do you like this?

Tweet

 

It's still about the bike: Lance Armstrong back in the saddle

 

It's still about the bike: Lance Armstrong back in the saddle

 

It's still about the bike: Lance Armstrong back in the saddle

Shades of Paris 2005. Lance Armstrong (RadioShack) addresses the crowd.

 

view thumbnail gallery

 

Former Sports Illustrated writer on difficulty of proving federal fraud

 

In 2011 Selena Roberts co-wrote a number of the most important articles on the US Federal investigation into Lance Armstrong and the US Postal team. Roberts left Sports Illustrated at the end of 2011, but she believes that a number of reasons may have led to the closing of the federal investigation into the seven-time Tour de France winner last Friday.

 

"It was always going to be a very difficult road for the feds for several reasons. This wasn't going to be just a doping case, this was going to be about fraud against the United States government. So it's not about whether he did or didn't [dope], it's did he commit fraud against the government? That's a high threshold," Roberts told Cyclingnews.

 

"Number two, it's not easy for the feds to take on Lance Armstrong because he's a very powerful force. He has many resources and he's a hero to a lot of people. It was a complicated legal case but it was also a very complicated PR case."

 

While public reaction from a number of parties that gave evidence in the case has been muted, Cyclingnews understands that the United States Attorney Andre Birotte's announcement came as a huge shock to many of those involved. Roberts, who worked on a number of controversial and high-profile stories during her time at Sports Illustrated, was taken aback by the timing and scenario in which the ruling was made.

 

"I was more surprised about the way the US attorney handled it by delivering his decision so late on the East Coast on the Friday before the Super Bowl. It's a pretty easy way, and%2

Edited February 5, 2012 by TNT1

[onetrackmind]

Frankie A is/was a doper, he is just suurtiet because he could not achieve greatness...... Think of others who can be added to the list. Landis, Squeeler LeMond etc etc

LeMond? How do you define greatness?

[TNT1]

Frankie A is/was a doper, he is just suurtiet because he could not achieve greatness...... Think of others who can be added to the list. Landis, Squeeler LeMond etc etc

 

Oh, so your issue with it is the fact that some chose to talk about it? Omerta, anyone?

 

I didn't think Oom was on the side of the secrecy.

[Tumbleweed]

Yeah, to be honest its not even remotely interesting to me anymore, he doped, he didnt dope, I dont care......he made for some great viewing and he had some great moments, that's all that interested me,.... I mean he climbed straight past a doped to the eyeballs Pantani who was probably also high on crack cocaine at the time and was considered the greatest climber the world had ever seen,.... hell, he deserves a break just for that!!

 

 

I watch the new guys, and still love the sport, but this Lance issue is cycling's Babe Ruth moment. I, for one, am not tired of this story. There are issues still to be resolved. One common factor is Bruyneel. He's still in the sport. How many riders under his charge have tested positive or been involved in doping scandals?

 

Frankie A is/was a doper, he is just suurtiet because he could not achieve greatness...... Think of others who can be added to the list. Landis, Squeeler LeMond etc etc

 

Andreu's testimony - and his wife's more so - is some of the most damning. While it doesn't relate to the record-breaking Tour wins, it does provide a great insight into the web of deceit Lance has weaved over the years. Pray tell, what do you believe, the Andreus stood to gain from giving their side of the story?

[nickc]

I watch the new guys, and still love the sport, but this Lance issue is cycling's Babe Ruth moment. I, for one, am not tired of this story. There are issues still to be resolved. One common factor is Bruyneel. He's still in the sport. How many riders under his charge have tested positive or been involved in doping scandals?

 

 

 

Andreu's testimony - and his wife's more so - is some of the most damning. While it doesn't relate to the record-breaking Tour wins, it does provide a great insight into the web of deceit Lance has weaved over the years. Pray tell, what do you believe, the Andreus stood to gain from giving their side of the story?

 

 

I hope not but somehow I think that this is going to be one of those stories where the complete truth is never going to surface and when it does there will always be someone who is going to discredit it.

Either way whether he did or not I would like to see the clear cut truth.

I do agree with you on what did Andreu and his wife stand to gain if this was all an elaborate story?

[Tumbleweed]

I hope not but somehow I think that this is going to be one of those stories where the complete truth is never going to surface and when it does there will always be someone who is going to discredit it.

Either way whether he did or not I would like to see the clear cut truth.

I do agree with you on what did Andreu and his wife stand to gain if this was all an elaborate story?

 

Clear-cut is always going to be difficult. We have to rely on circumstantial and anecdotal evidence here, and on a balance of probabilities. On that, Lance's defence fails.

 

What impresses me about the Andreus' evidence is that it was backed up by interviews conducted by David Walsh - yes, the troll - with her friends about why she called off the engagement. They confirmed that it was about the Lance doping issue. What would they stand to gain from it?

[nickc]

Clear-cut is always going to be difficult. We have to rely on circumstantial and anecdotal evidence here, and on a balance of probabilities. On that, Lance's defence fails.

 

What impresses me about the Andreus' evidence is that it was backed up by interviews conducted by David Walsh - yes, the troll - with her friends about why she called off the engagement. They confirmed that it was about the Lance doping issue. What would they stand to gain from it?

 

True - there is something there that needs to be looked at further.

 

On a lighter note it the Colonel was here we would have a clear unbiased opinion on the Armstrong Doping Debate.

[Squier]

To see what Novitzky actually found would be interesting, however, I doubt that we would get to see that. Even though everyone is still waiting for WADA to review the evidence and come up with some controversial anouncement, I don't think that anything will come of this. I'm sure that Novitzky would've had a case if he could prove that Lance doped. That would've been the starting point of the investigation. But now, the story is done. Get over it and move on.

[Tumbleweed]

True - there is something there that needs to be looked at further.

 

On a lighter note it the Colonel was here we would have a clear unbiased opinion on the Armstrong Doping Debate.

 

Hehehehe! Yeah, I miss the Colonel's input here. From accounts elsewhere, he seems to be getting on quite well.

[Tumbleweed]

To see what Novitzky actually found would be interesting, however, I doubt that we would get to see that. Even though everyone is still waiting for WADA to review the evidence and come up with some controversial anouncement, I don't think that anything will come of this. I'm sure that Novitzky would've had a case if he could prove that Lance doped. That would've been the starting point of the investigation. But now, the story is done. Get over it and move on.

 

Would love to hear Novitzky's take on the announcement.

[Lucky Luke.]

Hehehehe! Yeah, I miss the Colonel's input here. From accounts elsewhere, he seems to be getting on quite well.

 

He's been man down with the flu ever since he got pink in the SV league. It's been a hell of a job defending it these past two weeks.

[Tumbleweed]

He's been man down with the flu ever since he got pink in the SV league. It's been a hell of a job defending it these past two weeks.

 

Yeah, saw that, but his MX and other pursuits seem to be going well.

[GrumpyOldGuy]

I watch the new guys, and still love the sport, but this Lance issue is cycling's Babe Ruth moment. I, for one, am not tired of this story. There are issues still to be resolved. One common factor is Bruyneel. He's still in the sport. How many riders under his charge have tested positive or been involved in doping scandals?

 

 

Hmm, yeah, but Bruyneel is a separate issue, while he hides in Europe he will most likely not come under investigation from the American authorities, although he may find some heat if he decides to relocate or even visit.

 

There has to be a serious will on the behalf of the authorities to chase LA down, I am still not sure its there, but even if it is / was, investigating offences from years back is difficult, evidence disappears, is corrupted, people forget or pass on and that information is lost. Allegations are one thing, but actually proving it in court is another, and as time passes, it just gets harder and harder.

 

LA is still an American Icon with massive local public support which is hard to sway, and, like it took a very determined Judge years of gathering files to find fault and sentence another Italian Icon, Marco Pantani, (which sentence was even eventually overturned after a protracted legal battle),..... time, a determined will and hard concrete evidence is running out for the legal system to prosecute LA.

 

............then again perhaps he was totally clean.....!

Edited February 6, 2012 by GrumpyOldGuy

[fandacious]

I watch the new guys, and still love the sport, but this Lance issue is cycling's Babe Ruth moment. I, for one, am not tired of this story. There are issues still to be resolved. One common factor is Bruyneel. He's still in the sport. How many riders under his charge have tested positive or been involved in doping scandals?

 

 

 

Andreu's testimony - and his wife's more so - is some of the most damning. While it doesn't relate to the record-breaking Tour wins, it does provide a great insight into the web of deceit Lance has weaved over the years. Pray tell, what do you believe, the Andreus stood to gain from giving their side of the story?

 

nevermind bruyneel. The bigger problem it exposes is UCI's willingness to cover up and lie for its money makers