In 2006, The Times reprinted sections of L.A. Confidentiel, a book which claims Armstrong took performance-enhancing drugs. That book was co-written by Sunday Times chief sports writer David Walsh, probably the most prominent journalist among those accusing Armstrong of doping. Armstrong objected to these passages and sued The Sunday Times for libel which ultimately ended with the daily paying £300,000.
The UCI in October decided to revoke Armstrong’s seven TdF titles (1999–2005) based on evidence of doping by the cyclist as presented in the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency’s (USADA) “reasoned decision.” The Times lawyers have now written to Armstrong’s lawyers, claiming that, ‘It is clear that the proceedings were baseless and fraudulent. Your representations that you had never taken performance enhancing drugs were deliberately false.”
Pedal reported previously on the possibility of this British lawsuit, and of another lawsuit by SCA Promotions in the U.S.A (now evaluated at $12 million) and that the UCI is asking Armstrong to reimburse $3.8 million CDN in prize winnings from his seven TdF victories. There might possibly be a separate filing in Australia against Armstrong. However, given Armstrong’s estimated net worth of $125 million; he is likely to still retain a considerable fortune after these lawsuits and settlements have been dealt with.
But Armstrong may end up in jail for fraud and perjury; while under oath, he has repeatedly denied doping. It is also unclear if U.S. Federal investigators can or plan to resuscitate a two-year investigation of Armstrong that they abruptly dropped in February.
Read more in the Sunday Times HERE.
December 27th, 2012 at 9:10 am
I really wonder why he is the only one who is being chased!
How about all other cyclists that were cut with real
scientific evidence not by heresay.
How about digging back in time even more.
Ch.