Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Error message

An illegal choice has been detected. Please contact the site administrator.
news

USADA formally bans Lance Armstrong for life, disqualifies him from all results since 1 August 1998

USADA details grounds for its decision after Armstrong declines to head to arbitration

The United States Anti Doping Agency (USADA) has formally confirmed that it has banned Lance Armstrong from all sporting actiivity for life and has stripped him of all competitive results from 1 January 1998, a period that includes his seven consecutive Tour de France victories between 1999 and 2005.

The 40-year-old confirmed last night that he did not plan to seek an arbitration hearing to defend the charges that USADA laid against him and others in June.

The date of the start of the disqualification period has an additional significance in Armstrong's case; 1998 was the year in which he returned to the sport after beating cancer.

He would go on to finish fourth in the Vuelta a Espana in September that year, beginning his unparalleled dominance of the Tour de France the following season.

Results achieved before that disqualification period stand, including his victory in the 1993 World Road Race Championship.

A statement from USADA which includes details of the specific breaches of anti-doping rules for which he is being sanctioned is shown in full below. We will bring you further reaction to and analysis of this latest development in the case.

USADA statement, 24 August 2012

USADA announced today that Lance Armstrong has chosen not to move forward with the independent arbitration process and as a result has received a lifetime period of ineligibility and disqualification of all competitive results from August 1, 1998 through the present, as the result of his anti-doping rule violations stemming from his involvement in the United States Postal Service (USPS) Cycling Team Doping Conspiracy (USPS Conspiracy).

Following the dismissal of Mr. Armstrong’s lawsuit on Monday, August 20, 2012, by the federal court in Austin, Texas, Mr. Armstrong had until midnight on Thursday, August 23, to contest the evidence against him in a full evidentiary hearing with neutral arbitrators as provided by U.S. law.  However, when given the opportunity to challenge the evidence against him, and with full knowledge of the consequences, Mr. Armstrong chose not to contest the fact that he engaged in doping violations from at least August 1, 1998 and participated in a conspiracy to cover up his actions. As a result of Mr. Armstrong’s decision, USADA is required under the applicable rules, including the World Anti-Doping Code under which he is accountable, to disqualify his competitive results and suspend him from all future competition.

“Nobody wins when an athlete decides to cheat with dangerous performance enhancing drugs, but clean athletes at every level expect those of us here on their behalf, to pursue the truth to ensure the win-at-all-cost culture does not permanently overtake fair, honest competition” said USADA CEO, Travis T. Tygart.  “Any time we have overwhelming proof of doping, our mandate is to initiate the case through the process and see it to conclusion as was done in this case.”

As is every athlete’s right, if Mr. Armstrong would have contested the USADA charges, all of the evidence would have been presented in an open legal proceeding for him to challenge.  He chose not to do this knowing these sanctions would immediately be put into place.

The evidence against Lance Armstrong arose from disclosures made to USADA by more than a dozen witnesses who agreed to testify and provide evidence about their first-hand experience and/or knowledge of the doping activity of those involved in the USPS Conspiracy as well as analytical data. As part of the investigation Mr. Armstrong was invited to meet with USADA and be truthful about his time on the USPS team but he refused.

On June 12, 2012, USADA issued a notice letter informing Mr. Armstrong and five other individuals, including the USPS team director, team trainer and three team doctors, of USADA’s intent to open proceedings against them. On June 28, 2012, following a review process set forth in the applicable rules, USADA notified Mr. Armstrong and the other five individuals that the independent review panel’s finding confirmed sufficient and in fact overwhelming evidence, and that USADA was charging them with rule violations.

Numerous witnesses provided evidence to USADA based on personal knowledge acquired, either through direct observation of doping activity by Armstrong,or through Armstrong’s admissions of doping to them that Armstrong used EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone and cortisone during the period from before 1998 through 2005, and that he had previously used EPO, testosterone and hGH through 1996. Witnesses also provided evidence that Lance Armstrong gave to them, encouraged them to use and administered doping products or methods, including EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone and cortisone during the period from 1999 through 2005.  Additionally, scientific data showed Mr. Armstrong’s use of blood manipulation including EPO or blood transfusions during Mr. Armstrong’s comeback to cycling in the 2009 Tour de France.

The anti-doping rule violations for which Mr. Armstrong is being sanctioned are:

(1)    Use and/or attempted use of prohibited substances and/or methods including EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone, corticosteroids and masking agents.

(2)    Possession of prohibited substances and/or methods including EPO, blood transfusions and related equipment (such as needles, blood bags, storage containers and other transfusion equipment and blood parameters measuring devices), testosterone, corticosteroids and masking agents.

(3)    Trafficking of EPO, testosterone, and corticosteroids.

(4)    Administration and/or attempted administration to others of EPO, testosterone, and cortisone.

(5)    Assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, covering up and other complicity involving one or more anti-doping rule violations and/or attempted anti-doping rule violations.

These activities are defined as anti-doping rule violations under the USADA Protocol for Olympic and Paralympic Movement Testing, the United States Olympic Committee National Anti-Doping Policies, USA Cycling rules and the International Cycling Union (UCI) Anti-Doping Rules (UCI ADR), all of which have adopted the World Anti-Doping Code (Code) and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List.

In accordance with the Code, aggravating circumstances including involvement in multiple anti-doping rule violations and participation in a sophisticated doping scheme and conspiracy as well as trafficking, administration and/or attempted administration of a prohibited substance or method, justify a period of ineligibility greater than the standard sanction. Accordingly, Mr. Armstrong has received a lifetime period of ineligibility for his numerous anti-doping rule violations, including his involvement in trafficking and administering doping products to others.  A lifetime period of ineligibility as described in the Code prevents Mr. Armstrong from participating in any activity or competition organized by any signatory to the Code or any member of any signatory.

In addition to the lifetime ban, Mr. Armstrong will be disqualified from any and all competitive results obtained on and subsequent to August 1, 1998, including forfeiture of any medals, titles, winnings, finishes, points and prizes.

As noted above, Mr. Armstrong challenged the arbitration process in federal court.  In response, the court found that “the USADA arbitration rules, which largely follow those of the American Arbitration Association (AAA) are sufficiently robust to satisfy the requirements of due process.” USADA’s rules provide that where an athlete or other person is sanctioned because they fail to contest USADA’s charges in arbitration, the sanction shall not be reopened or subject to appeal unless the athlete or other person can demonstrate that he did not receive actual or constructive notice of the opportunity to contest the sanction.  Because Mr. Armstrong could have had a hearing before neutral arbitrators to contest USADA’s evidence and sanction and he voluntarily chose not to do so, USADA’s sanction is final.

In an effort to aid athletes, as well as all support team members such as parents and coaches, in understanding the rules applicable to them, USADA provides comprehensive instruction on its website on the testing process and prohibited substances, how to obtain permission to use a necessary medication, and the risks and dangers of taking supplements as well as performance-enhancing and recreational drugs. In addition, the agency manages a drug reference hotline, Drug Reference Online (www.GlobalDRO.com), conducts educational sessions with National Governing Bodies and their athletes, and proactively distributes a multitude of educational materials, such as the Prohibited List, easy-reference wallet cards, periodic newsletters, and protocol and policy reference documentation.

USADA is responsible for the testing and results management process for athletes in the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Movement, and is equally dedicated to preserving the integrity of sport through research initiatives and educational programs.

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

40 comments

Avatar
SideBurn | 11 years ago
0 likes

Still sounds like guilty until proven innocent; arbitration is where people compromise and meet each other half way. What was Lance to do, offer 3.5 of his titles and becombe a three and half time winner? I want to hear the evidence; this is a sad day for cycling. Incidentally his supposed 'partner in crime' Dr Ferrari has a lot to say on his site (www.53x12.com) he is supposed to have been banned as well; except that he claims differently. I will be keeping an eye on Dr F's site for the other side of the story...

Avatar
TheHatter | 11 years ago
0 likes

will they also remove his appearance from future showings of Dodgeball?

Avatar
Super Domestique | 11 years ago
0 likes

Shouldn't the statement date be 2012?

Sorry. Not trying to be picky!

Avatar
Mat Brett replied to Super Domestique | 11 years ago
0 likes
Super Domestique wrote:

Shouldn't the statement date be 2012?

Sorry. Not trying to be picky!

Yep. It is now.

Avatar
mattbibbings | 11 years ago
0 likes

Spen +1

This seems farcical. How can such a ban be legitmate in a process that presumes guilt unless innocence is proven?

I mean where could USADA have got an idea like that from?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

What hasn't been said yet though is what Armstrongs co-accused are going to do? One assumes they all have the individual right to attend the arbitration process? Could still be cards left to play in this one.

Avatar
spen | 11 years ago
0 likes

Any system in which you are considered guilty until proven innocent can only be called corrupt

Avatar
ALIHISGREAT replied to spen | 11 years ago
0 likes
spen wrote:

Any system in which you are considered guilty until proven innocent can only be called corrupt

Its the same as the distinction between a guilty and not guilty plea...

Armstrong has played it well in that he hasnt actually addmiteed guilt.. so people like you are fooled..

But the truth is he didn't want the evidence to come out in public and knew he'd already lost.

Avatar
zanf replied to ALIHISGREAT | 11 years ago
0 likes
ALIHISGREAT wrote:
spen wrote:

Any system in which you are considered guilty until proven innocent can only be called corrupt

Its the same as the distinction between a guilty and not guilty plea...

Armstrong has played it well in that he hasnt actually addmiteed guilt.. so people like you are fooled..

But the truth is he didn't want the evidence to come out in public and knew he'd already lost.

Exactly. He had until Thursday midnight to contest the charges otherwise it would be considered an admission of guilt. He pretty much entered a 'no contest' plea.

If he was innocent, surely he would have contested this until his dying breath?

Avatar
Shanghaied replied to zanf | 11 years ago
0 likes
zanf wrote:
ALIHISGREAT wrote:
spen wrote:

Any system in which you are considered guilty until proven innocent can only be called corrupt

Its the same as the distinction between a guilty and not guilty plea...

Armstrong has played it well in that he hasnt actually addmiteed guilt.. so people like you are fooled..

But the truth is he didn't want the evidence to come out in public and knew he'd already lost.

Exactly. He had until Thursday midnight to contest the charges otherwise it would be considered an admission of guilt. He pretty much entered a 'no contest' plea.

If he was innocent, surely he would have contested this until his dying breath?

Not sure if Armstrong is guilty or not but I feel that it needs to be pointed out that spen does have a point in that the "no contest" plea is basically an uniquely American practice, and does not really exist in any other common law jurisdictions, and for good reasons. A "no contest" is essentially a guilty plea in most American jurisdictions. You could argue that Armstrong simply refused to enter a plea, and in all common law jurisdictions that is treated as an "not guilty" plea. Refusing to fight a charge is not an admission of guilt , and the burden of proof is still on the accusers. Presumption of innocence is a basic human right, like the right to life - no one would argue that a killer should be able to get away with murder if the victim didn't attempt to defend himself. Whether Armstrong admitted to doping should have been irrelevant, the USADA should still be required to present all the evidences before reaching a decision.

On the other hand the USADA is not a court of law, and as stated before the earlier federal investigation against Armstrong was dropped because they knew they couldn't prove his guilt in a court of law. Of course I think that things as severe as lifetime bans should only be handed down by courts of law or organisation running on similar standards.

Avatar
festival replied to spen | 11 years ago
0 likes

To the remaining followers of the great cheat, don't let the facts get in the way of your faith.

Pages

Latest Comments