Home News Lance Armstrong allowed to use ‘everybody was doping’ defence in fraud trial

Lance Armstrong allowed to use ‘everybody was doping’ defence in fraud trial

SHARE
Armstrong and Hincapie

A federal judge has set some limits on key evidence and testimony in Lance Armstrong’s upcoming $100 million civil trial.

Armstrong faces a 2018 trial as the federal government seeks to recover more than $30 million the Postal Service paid to sponsor his team for several Tour de France victories. Those wins were stripped away after Armstrong’s 2013 confession to using banned performance-enhancing drugs and methods.

If liable for damages, Armstrong could be subject to penalties in the range of $100 million.

Tuesday’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper in Washington sets ground rules for evidence that both sides want to present regarding harm to the Postal Service, doping use in cycling and the character and motivation of Armstrong and his former teammate Floyd Landis, who initially filed the lawsuit in 2010 and stands to gain up to 25 percent of the damages awarded.

The ruling bars the government’s expert witnesses from testifying that the Postal Service got no financial benefit whatsoever from its sponsorship, a decision Armstrong’s lawyers consider a key victory for arguing whether the agency was actually damaged by his doping. The government experts will be allowed to testify as to whether the agency was damaged beyond the value of its original sponsorship.

Lawyers for Armstrong and Landis both claimed victory in the ruling.

”We think it’s great. The court says very clearly the government cannot pursue that the sponsorship had no value because of team doping. They have to prove damages to Postal Service after 2013 and Lance’s confession,” said Elliott Peters, an attorney for Armstrong.

”The rulings largely fall our way,” said Landis attorney Paul D. Scott. ”The court left open a clear path for the government and Landis to prove up damages arising from negative publicity associated with the disclosure of Armstrong’s doping and concealment.”

The judge will also allow one of Armstrong’s experts to testify on the rampant use of doping in cycling in Armstrong’s era, opening up a line of defense that the government should have known, or did know, that Armstrong’s team was cheating and sponsored his team anyway.

The judge put some limits on a key piece of Armstrong evidence: reports commissioned by the Postal Service that said the sponsorship had ”earned” the agency more than $100 million in global exposure. Most of those reports were ruled inadmissible, but Armstrong will be allowed to show that Postal Service officials had accepted the reports’ findings.

Armstrong’s lawyers will also be allowed – with limits – to question Landis’ credibility and potential financial motivation for filing the lawsuit. Landis himself was stripped of the 2006 Tour de France title for doping.

The government will be allowed to call as witnesses Betsy Andreu and former Tour de France winner Greg LeMond. Andreu, the wife of former Armstrong teammate Frankie Andreu, provided the first sworn testimony of doping allegations against Armstrong in a 2005 lawsuit. LeMond has publicly clashed with both Armstrong and Landis.

Tuesday’s ruling also allows the government to bring evidence about Armstrong’s relationship with other sponsors, such as Nike and Trek, that dropped him after the doping scandal broke.

1 COMMENT

  1. Greg LeMond?
    Please read:

    Sports Illustrated, December 25, 1989
    “Le Grand LeMond”

    “LeMond had a second shot of iron and started feeling stronger. … ‘It changed my entire outlook’, says Lemond, ‘obviously there was nothing wrong with me physically'”

    That was the year before EPO became available for general medical sale. It had been reasearched for 10 years, had known effects, and was on the cusp of release. Also EPO must be taken with iron to work correctly.

    Maybe LeMond had no idea what was happening at the time, but he certainly does now. If he was just a guinea pig , then I sympathize with him.

    But if he allows himself to be used as a foil, he should at least be honest and say: “I had no idea what was happening to me, but you knew!”

LEAVE A REPLY