How would he prove it?
He could undermine the evidence against him. It seems he has realised he can't.
I think the criminal analogy is reasonable, just the stakes are lower.
I don't get this "he can't prove a negative" defence. Read the charging letter... This is about so much more than just his own alleged doping. A dozen or more witnesses, testifying that there was a big conspiracy including riders persuaded/cajoled into doping. Are you seriously saying he shouldn't need to respond to that because it's hard to disprove?
I am saddened by the whole thing whether he's guilty or not. Armstrong was an inspiration to millions and helped to make road cycle racing into the global sport it is today. Whatever the outcome this is not good for the sport in my opinion.
Every few generations a phenomenal athlete comes along in any sport. Looks like we'll never know for certain if it was Armstrong in the cycling world. 🙁
Interview with usada CEO
[url= http://www.danpatrick.com/2012/08/24/usadas-tygart-comments-on-decision-to-strip-armstrong-of-tour-de-france-titles/ ]http://www.danpatrick.com/2012/08/24/usadas-tygart-comments-on-decision-to-strip-armstrong-of-tour-de-france-titles/[/url]
Are you seriously saying he shouldn't need to respond to that because it's hard to disprove?
I think the point was that it's logically impossible to prove a negative. So nothing to do with the case just a point of logic.
It's no different to any other such proceeding. Evidence and witnesses are presented, challenged, and the whole thing is decided on a defined balance
Tygart has said that they will release the evidence when the time is right.
I don't get this "he can't prove a negative" defence
What spin said it was reference to how he would prove he is clean now not how he would refute the charges.
As I said I think it is an admission of guilt and and proof that he wont ever actually admit it.
he has done the best he can so he can keep up the myth BS that he never failed a drug test [ lie] , most tested athlete [ unlikely to be true and certainly not 500-600 tests he claims] and say it was all a witch hunt etc and that was why he did not defend himself
LA is not a quitter and he just quit
I am sure h ha s strategy ready for LA the martyr stripped of titles without a fair trial etc to continue this spin of what he is like
What he is is a cheat and a liar and we can all be certain now he will never admit it nor seek redemption
Whatever the outcome this is not good for the sport in my opinion.
What this does to cycling is up to cyclists and fans IMO.
Another drugs cheat - the biggest, most sanctimonious, and now hypocritical ever - has been found.
This can only be a giood thing.
This ^ I really don't understand why rooting out drugs cheats is not good for sport? They either need to be rehabilitated ( millar, vaughters) or ostracised ( Armstrong ) depending on their admission of guilt. Vino is one who lacked contrition and im glad to see the back of him (and Armstrong) but the sport needs more people to come clean and explain why this all happened and what measures should be done to make sure it doesn't happen again, would like some dirt to stick to McQuaid though, all the time he is there is proof that the governing body is able to be manipulated by those with money.
LA comes over as a fairly nasty piece of work which is a shame as there is no doubt he's done a lot of good for cancer sufferers over the years.
From what I've read I'm left with no doubt in my mind that LA was guilty over doping. I'm also certain that the only way he's now decided to stop fighting it is because it still leaves that very slim get-out that he might still be innocent to those few still gullible enough to believe him. Given what we've seen over the years I'm certain LA would fight this (and enjoy doing so) in court if he felt he had a chance.
The US governing bodies have previous for covering up for their own drug cheats even after they've failed multiple drug tests (e.g. Carl Lewis and some 100 or so others). That, plus the acrimonious history with LA, seems to mean that the US authorities are now going out of their way to prove they're not covering up this time.
We need Quincy on the case, he'll solve it in less than an hour, probably ending with a dramatic confession from Lance as he's led away in handcuffs!
Very interesting that LA MUST be guilty I thought it was innocent until PROVEN guilty?
If the USADA have evidence and witnesses (allegedly) why are they not prepared to disclose this information to LA's defence team prior to the 'hearing'?
In any other court of law/arbitration system the defence have the right to full disclosure of the 'prosecution' evidence to enable them to prepare a case but USADA deem that they do not have to follow this?
So did LA dope or not? I don't know either way and neither does the rest of the world as there has been no PUBLISHED and VERIFIED evidence. If this was in the UK it wouldn't even get to court as it's so blatantly biased against the accused.
SO is LA guilty because he's no longer fighting this? No he's not guilty because he's not been PROVEN to be so, he may be but he may not.
So in a nutshell if you think he's guilty say that but if you know he's guilty show us the legally binding evidence so we can judge LA fairly.
I hope that the evidence will be made public so we can all judge for ourselves based on real hard data and not speculation, hype and media manipulation.
As a former cancer patient (testicular and skin cancer) I still wear my LiveStrong band with pride as I believe even if LA is guilty raising $500 million to help fight cancer is the real news here not the drugs stuff.
there has been no PUBLISHED and VERIFIED evidence. If this was in the UK it wouldn't even get to court
pay attention at the back.
it's not going to court. that's an intrinsic part of the LA defence and why he is now 'giving in'.
and as for "media hype and media manipulation"?
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain.
I haven't read all three pages of this thread so someone might aleady have said something like this but.....
Like or loathe Lance Armstrong, what is the point in chasing sportsmen from the past? They're not chasing all those who were probably on amphetamines and god knows what else in the 60s?? Then what about Indurain? Merkcx? Pantani? Lemond? Fignon?
Its likely that the majority of the top half of the pro peleton was taking some kind of performance enhancement.
Does it not destroy people's memories of epic battles up Alp d'huez and all the other Alpine climbs? Nobody was watching the (clean?) stragglers trying to stay away from the autobus, it was at the front end where people were trying to rip each others legs off - drugs or no drugs.
Why are they wasting their money on court costs and investigations? Howsabout spend the money on preventing drug use now?
If Lance wasn't clean, no one will ever know who should have won those tours he won.
Seems like its just a personal vendetta. Lance pissed someone off and now they're after him.
If the USADA have evidence and witnesses (allegedly) why are they not prepared to disclose this information to LA's defence team prior to the 'hearing'?
I SAID PAY ATTENTION AT THE BACK.
it's a usada panel not a courtroom, he tried to get it to go to federal court where his legal money can come into play,but failed.
read up on the story on any reputable cycling website and you will have the facts that people on STW seem to have trouble grasping instead of jumping to conclusions on what is really going on in the LA case, you will glean more than some soundbite from the BBC news or from naive questions and theories posted on STW
Seems like its just a personal vendetta. Lance pissed someone off and now they're after him.
Lance also successfully sued a number of people for accusing him of doping, so we might not have seen the end of this in the courts - no matter what he wants.
Err if he sued other people the surely he decides if it goes to Court...
[i]Seems like its just a personal vendetta. Lance pissed someone off and now they're after him.[/i]
Doesn't hold up for me at all. Even if wrongdoing is widespread, it's totally correct to go after the most significant perpetrators
if anyone knows about vendettas it will be LA- he has dished out a few over the years.
Its not a vendetta it is an attempt to catch a cheat who has avoided the authorities for years.
Err if he sued other people the surely he decides if it goes to Court...
He sued and won. I suspect the people he took money off might look for a way to get it back, given he's pretty much admitted doping and also perjuring himself.
epicsteve - Membergiven he's pretty much admitted doping and also perjuring himself.
Yeah, that'll stand up in court.
I doubt the court will be as charitable as some on here and i am pretty sure a conviction for doping and the striping of his titles for said offences during said tours will indeed by accepted by the courts as guilt...either way LA will likely have to defend it and his decision.
Oh hold on a minute all LA has to do is not turn up nor defend the claim as that is what the innocent do and his lack of defence will of course mean nothing
Junkyard - Member
if anyone knows about vendettas it will be LA- he has dished out a few over the years.
Its not a vendetta it is an attempt to catch a cheat who has avoided the authorities for years.
+ 1000
Junkyard - MemberI doubt the court will be as charitable as some on here
I think it'll be interesting if it does end up in the courts but tbh the federal prosecutors already tried to bring a criminal case and dropped the charges, do you see it being any different just a few months on? The talk of admissions of guilt is completely meaningless in court.
Course, the criminal courts have a higher burden of proof than USADA.
The bloke is pretty amazing. Don't forget he beat cancer when it was almost a given he was a dead man walking, he also finished 2nd in the tour just 2 years ago
Could it have been with a Withnail-style bottle of "unadulterated child's piss" down the trouser and a pipe taped to the end of "the old chap"?
dannyh - that's the kind of comment when I wish there was a 'like' button on STW.
Been done already:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Pollentier
Things have moved on a bit since then
