http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/jan05/jan09news

Much to the dispair of certain posters, Armstrong is looking clean (and even richer soon enough):

Armstrong wins suit

Lance Armstrong has scored a significant victory in his libel battle against The Sunday Times and its chief sports writer David Walsh.

A judge in London's high court has struck out the newspaper's defence in its entirety after the six-times Tour de France winner sued them for libel. The suit was prompted by an article last June, bylined Alan English, repeating allegations made in a book LA Confidentiel: The Secrets of Lance Armstrong which Walsh co-authored but was published only in France. The newspaper had sought to argue that the article was true. They could now face a six-figure compensation payout to the American. Mr Justice Eady said he considered the tone of the article to be "sensational" and to "stir things up".

The book calls on 52 witnesses, whose evidence, as Walsh admitted when the book was published, is "circumstantial". Armstrong has repeatedly denied allegations that he has taken performance-enhancing drugs. Upon publication of the book and article, the Tour de France winner mobilised legal teams in London and Paris. News International has removed the article from its online archive.

Armstrong is also involved in a bitter court case in his native Texas, having sued his former personal assistant, Mike Anderson. Anderson claimed he wanted $500,000 and other benefits under an employment contract. Now Anderson has counter-sued for an unspecified amount, accusing Armstrong of fraud, breach of contract and causing him severe emotional distress.

Source: The Guardian

Sadly, one "legend" has proven to be a doper:

In the doping case involving veterinarian José Landuyt and Belgian cycling star Johan Museeuw, the public prosecutor of Kortrijk (Belgium) issued a final evaluation on Friday. As Belgian newspapers De Morgen and Het Laatste Nieuws reported, the court found overwhelming indication that Museeuw used EPO and Aranesp in the year 2003 and stated: "Taking into consideration the investigated SMS and fax messages, the examinations and confessions made by Landuyt as well as other persons, it is established that Johan Museeuw has definitely taken EPO and Aranesp."

SMS messages sent from Landuyt to Museeuw clearly indicate the veterinarian advised the rider on how to use what they call "wasps", a code name for Aranesp which was confirmed by Landuyt. In a message to Museeuw dated July 7, 2003, Landuyt wrote, "Now you should take 80 to 100 wasps, and upon departure on July 9, minimum 40 and maximum 60, then you will be clean as of July 19."

On July 27, Museeuw sent a message to Landuyt saying: "I have 52", to which Landuyt responded "Take salt and drink a lot." One day later, Landuyt again received an SMS from Museeuw that said "Still 52", to which he replied, "Snuff salt and drink a lot." The court considered it highly probable the Belgian rider was trying to bring down his haematocrit level, which must be under 50 in order to be declared fit for racing under UCI rules. Blood boosting drugs such as EPO will raise a rider's haematocrit.

Busted. :mad:

If the suit would of happened in the US it would of been 8 or 9 figures.

It is one of the things I noticed that is different in Europe than it the US. The top end figures on law suits are much lower than here in the US. I'm certain the publisher's of LA Confidential made 7 or 8 figures off the book. What they will pay out for the lawsuit pales in comparison. Great return on investment. This may explain why there are so many sensationalist newspapers in the UK. Even if they are sued, they pay it off out of petty cash. It is relly no deterent. Just make up a story and then quitely pay off a lawsuit out of petty cash.

I doubt if LA will be any richer. He probably spent all his award and then some on lawyers.

Unfortunately, winning the lawsuit does not really prove LA is clean. The Nay sayers will keep on Nay saying. Personally I think he is clean (I hope he is clean), it would be very bad for US cycling if he were proven a doper.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/jan05/jan09news

Much to the dispair of certain posters, Armstrong is looking clean (and even richer soon enough):



Sadly, one "legend" has proven to be a doper:



Busted. :mad:

It's unfortunate what they're doing to both of them.
I never doubted for a second that Museeuw doped, just like pretty much everybody else of his generation. Shame that they're dirtying his name for no good reason since he has already retired. Some of his classics victories are absolutely beautiful.

More:

Rather than accede to making the changes to the Sunday Times article called for by Justice Eady in his judgment, Rupert Murdoch's Times Newspapers Ltd. has removed the offending article from its online archive. Although no final judgment on a libel award for Armstrong has been determined, nor is it clear whether Times Newspapers Ltd. will appeal the decision, with Justice Eady refusing to implement a cost-capping order for damages.

That said, besides recouping the $140,000 in costs from his solicitors Schillings, Armstrong could likely win a substantial settlement from Times Newspapers Ltd. over this libel finding, a clear vindication for Armstrong in his ongoing conflict with Irish sportswriter David Walsh, who has been the six-time Tour de France's journalistic bête noire for years.

Already in six figures for the recouped legal costs alone- damages will be more. Actually the U.K. is more supportive of libel cases brought by public figures- the US legal system thanks to the precedent set by New York Times v. Sullivan is much less likely to support such a suit.

More details- http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2005/jan05/jan10news

BTW- other dopers had "beautiful victories" but they were still dopers though. Reason they are pressing it is that he was still invovled heavily with a Pro Tour team after retirement. And he cheated and got caught- just because he was popular doesn't excuse that. If it did David Millar would be off the hook too.

Wow, talk about the previous impression of a guy being wrong- check this set of quotes from Capt. Wasp, doper extrodinaire:

Museeuw: "Do you want a second Pantani?"

Johan Museeuw, whose use of doping products in 2003 was recently established by a Belgian public prosecutor still maintains his innocence. At the moment, the 'Lion of Flanders' refuses to answer any questions from the media about the allegations made against him in the Landuyt case, but might start a public debate at a time of his choice.

"I don't want to and cannot talk about the content of the court's files," he explained. "I know that I haven't done anything wrong and have nothing to hide. If this goes on, I'll open up a debate at the right moment, and at the right place to defend myself. But I cannot do this now."

Museeuw, who won Paris-Roubaix three times, also feels mistreated by the media. "What is the meaning of all these so-called revelations of the last few days - which to me, contain nothing new - in comparison to what has been reported before?" he asked. "Do you want to create a second Pantani in this country? It could just be too much for me too. At the moment, I feel the media treats me worse than Marc Dutroux," referring to a convicted serial child abuser and murderer, whose case plunged Belgium in a deep social and political crisis in the late nineties.

Yeah, that's classy! :rolleyes:

Yeah I found that part you high-lighted a bit much.

He should have just said "Fcku off, I did what was necessary. I did nothing wrong. It was (is) the way the game is played. Get your heads out of the sand."

I keep wondering if it is a slightly veiled threat to the Belgium (Flemish) cycling authorities that "opening up a debate" means spilling the beans about how complicit they (probably) were in all of this. What seems to start the crack-down in each country is when the cycling federations start to do something about the doping situation, which hasn't really happened yet in Holland and Spain (Portugal) but seems to have occurred in most of the other Europeans countries.

Don't you know? In Holland dope is legal.

Don't you know? In Holland dope is legal.

Know it? I've experienced it!

regarding the Armstrong settlement - this is being trumpeted as a victory over Walsh but I'm afraid I have to disabuse you on a couple of counts:

First, the judgement is against the Sunday Times, holding them responsible for the contents of an article written by Alan English in which Justice Eady judges the article to have sensationalised claims made in 'LA Confidentiel'. Justice Eady is talking about the article not the book. Still, he's found against Rupert Murdoch which can't be a bad thing.

Secondly, the case against the book will be heard in France as the book has yet to be published in English. There, the judgement has already gone against Armstrong and Walsh was careful to secure promises from Lemond, O'Reilly etc to testify in court should Armstrong sue. So this may not be the foregone conclusion that some would like to think it is.

BTW anyone know anything about Armstrong's suit against Emma O'Reilly?

regarding the Armstrong settlement - this is being trumpeted as a victory over Walsh but I'm afraid I have to disabuse you on a couple of counts:

First, the judgement is against the Sunday Times, holding them responsible for the contents of an article written by Alan English in which Justice Eady judges the article to have sensationalised claims made in 'LA Confidentiel'. Justice Eady is talking about the article not the book. Still, he's found against Rupert Murdoch which can't be a bad thing.

Secondly, the case against the book will be heard in France as the book has yet to be published in English. There, the judgement has already gone against Armstrong and Walsh was careful to secure promises from Lemond, O'Reilly etc to testify in court should Armstrong sue. So this may not be the foregone conclusion that some would like to think it is.

BTW anyone know anything about Armstrong's suit against Emma O'Reilly?

interesting that Lemond has agreed to testify, maybe he will also testify in Lance's 5MM insurance settlement suit.
Does Lemond knows the truth about Armstrong? I bet he is in a pretty good position to be in the know. Maybe that is why Lemond and the likes of Andy Hampsten voiced their opinion about Lance before he won his 6th.
Hey Lance, remember the conversation you had with Greg at a bar boasting you would win next year's tour because you had something that nobody else had yet? I bet Greg still remembers.

Seems gleeful reporting of Armstrong's triumph were premature to say the least...

These are preliminary hearings in which Justice Eady has struck out part of the defense for the Sunday Times (the defense that runs 'oh, sorry, I repeated allegations someone else made, honestly believing they were true') but left the paper with the defense that there was 'reasonable grounds to suspect'.

Procycling (http://www.procycling.com/news.aspx?ID=804) has a well balanced article.

This will run and run and a win for Armstrong is by no menas a foregone conclusion.

He should have just said "Fcku off, I did what was necessary. I did nothing wrong. It was (is) the way the game is played. Get your heads out of the sand."

I always liked Fignon's response when he got caught. He sort of did the old shoulder shrug and "so what?" routine.

According to procycling the Landuyt case may involve half of the Flemish pros. Maybe it will be enough to get the osteriches to pull their head out of the sand and realize how endemic doping really is.

in CycleSport (I'm paraphrasing)
I did what I did and took what I took and I'll suffer the consequences (referring to any future effects) it was my decision

in CycleSport (I'm paraphrasing)
I did what I did and took what I took and I'll suffer the consequences (referring to any future effects) it was my decision

Got to love his realists' attitude. None of this "I made a mistake, or I'm innocent, or I never doped no matter what the tests say, or I've been framed/screwed, please forgive me B.S." that seems to be the usual routine today.

Fignon always was one of my favorite riders.

I've always like Berden a lot, which makes it a shame for me that we won't see him for the next couple of years given that he now has the honor of being the first crosser to get caught using EPO. But at least he admitted to it, and didn't keep up the senseless denials like so many do.

where H-Crit level drops from overtraining/racing, etc and riders get desperate.
RE: UCH and Fignon, his realism matched Anquetils "You think riders can do what we do without being on something?"