Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - Lance Armstrong to be charged with doping?

Cheese · 01-18-2013, 06:36 AM

http://www.tsn.ca/cycling/story/?id=413848

I expected to hear Armstrong deny he took banned substances within the past five years, and specifically when he unretired in 2009 for two years. Armstrong made that denial, and for his legal team, this was probably one of the most important parts of the interview.
Here's the reason. The time limit to criminally prosecute someone for possession and distribution of steroids and banned substances (which is unlawful) is five years. So that means that Armstrong could admit to using banned substances back in 1999 and the early 2000s since he's comfortably outside the statute of limitations.
However, since the five-year limitation period has not expired in connection with his alleged drug use in 2009 and 2010, he could not admit to that. Effectively, Armstrong could admit to drug use, but he had to be careful associating it with a recent timeframe.
So, when Oprah asked him if he had used performance enhancing drugs in 2009 and 2010, he adamantly denied it, saying it was "not true" and that the last time, "I crossed the line…was 2005". This is despite USADA, the U.S. federal anti-doping agency, finding that it was not only likely that Armstrong used banned substances in 2009-10, but highly probable. In the view of USADA, Armstrong's test results provided a "compelling argument consistent with blood doping".
Overall, while Armstrong is not immune from criminal prosecution, his Oprah interview did not make things appreciably worse for him.

01-18-2013, 06:36 AM	#388
Cheese Franchise Player Join Date: Mar 2002 Exp:	http://www.tsn.ca/cycling/story/?id=413848 I expected to hear Armstrong deny he took banned substances within the past five years, and specifically when he unretired in 2009 for two years. Armstrong made that denial, and for his legal team, this was probably one of the most important parts of the interview. Here's the reason. The time limit to criminally prosecute someone for possession and distribution of steroids and banned substances (which is unlawful) is five years. So that means that Armstrong could admit to using banned substances back in 1999 and the early 2000s since he's comfortably outside the statute of limitations. However, since the five-year limitation period has not expired in connection with his alleged drug use in 2009 and 2010, he could not admit to that. Effectively, Armstrong could admit to drug use, but he had to be careful associating it with a recent timeframe. So, when Oprah asked him if he had used performance enhancing drugs in 2009 and 2010, he adamantly denied it, saying it was "not true" and that the last time, "I crossed the line…was 2005". This is despite USADA, the U.S. federal anti-doping agency, finding that it was not only likely that Armstrong used banned substances in 2009-10, but highly probable. In the view of USADA, Armstrong's test results provided a "compelling argument consistent with blood doping". Overall, while Armstrong is not immune from criminal prosecution, his Oprah interview did not make things appreciably worse for him.