01-11-2013, 04:35 PM
I referenced this earlier. If he does confess in any form, he might just be crazy.
That is the rationale for this story. But ranged against that logic are several powerful strands.
The greatest of these is that Armstrong currently faces several very expensive lawsuits: first, there is the "whistleblower" lawsuit filed by Armstrong's former team-mate and nemesis Floyd Landis (and it is still possible the US justice department could join this action under the False Claims Act); then, there is an $11m civil suit from Texas insurance company SCA Promotions, which is returning the compliment after Armstrong successfully sued the company for a 2005 payout over a disputed Tour win bonus; finally, the British Sunday Times is suing Armstrong for the return of the $500,000 damages the newspaper was obliged to pay Armstrong over publication of excerpts from journalist David Walsh's LA Confidentiel, plus $1m in costs.
It is hard to see how Armstrong could defend any of these cases if he made even a limited admission of doping. That is potentially a bankrupting situation. Worse, for Armstrong, any confession would raise the possibility of prosecution for perjury for statements Armstrong has made under oath denying doping. Regarding the original SCA Promotions case, Armstrong probably now escapes that jeopardy because of the statute of limitations; but he could still be liable for criminal investigation for depositions made to a federal grand jury in 2010.
So the legal risk to Armstrong as a consequence of confessing is huge – certainly, impoverishment, possibly bankruptcy, and conceivably prison.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/201...ess-doping
That is the rationale for this story. But ranged against that logic are several powerful strands.
The greatest of these is that Armstrong currently faces several very expensive lawsuits: first, there is the "whistleblower" lawsuit filed by Armstrong's former team-mate and nemesis Floyd Landis (and it is still possible the US justice department could join this action under the False Claims Act); then, there is an $11m civil suit from Texas insurance company SCA Promotions, which is returning the compliment after Armstrong successfully sued the company for a 2005 payout over a disputed Tour win bonus; finally, the British Sunday Times is suing Armstrong for the return of the $500,000 damages the newspaper was obliged to pay Armstrong over publication of excerpts from journalist David Walsh's LA Confidentiel, plus $1m in costs.
It is hard to see how Armstrong could defend any of these cases if he made even a limited admission of doping. That is potentially a bankrupting situation. Worse, for Armstrong, any confession would raise the possibility of prosecution for perjury for statements Armstrong has made under oath denying doping. Regarding the original SCA Promotions case, Armstrong probably now escapes that jeopardy because of the statute of limitations; but he could still be liable for criminal investigation for depositions made to a federal grand jury in 2010.
So the legal risk to Armstrong as a consequence of confessing is huge – certainly, impoverishment, possibly bankruptcy, and conceivably prison.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/201...ess-doping