Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Lance Armstrong may go back to court again today in his battle against the US Anti Doping Agency that organizations accusing him the seven time tour -- -- winner.
-- using performance enhancing drugs now Armstrong says the agency doesn't have the jurisdiction to investigate him yesterday.
-- judge dismissed his first attempt to fight this in court.
Pretty interesting attended that here's Barack.
Our legal panel for today with -- Fox News legal analyst Lisa Leo and defense attorney chip -- and so it's only Tuesday.
They've been busy day court down in Austin, Texas -- Armstrong said listen.
I that -- case against these guys at least the judge did not like.
The packaging what exactly not because I am I think it's funny what happened okay so -- lawyers present at I think what an eighty plus page brief saying.
His constitutional rights are violated the stat the other you know thrown the kitchen sink of lawyers often -- -- -- But they -- kitchen to get the judge set after six hours working this.
Played a second to file this properly just get right to the point tell me what's being violated here and the judge rightly threw -- -- the judge did say -- Atlanta got twenty days you can -- file which -- what's -- be happening now -- so here's the argument ship that was trying to be made amidst all those pages.
That the Anti Doping Agency violated Armstrong's constitutional rights to due process.
And that basically the agency has its case against him.
In order to justify.
Its own existence as and the defense attorney what do you think about that argument.
Well and our country everybody's -- tied to the procedural due process and it's very important in Everett confront witnesses that you can go out and gather evidence on your -- On your own behalf -- that the proceeding itself is gonna be fair and not already outcome oriented but -- -- attorneys are trying to argue here is that the procedures set up by this doping agency is set up only to have one conclusion.
And that is guilt.
And when you read through the lengthy lengthy allegations and there it really sets up this person's reputation is at stake.
And if he loses this because it's only gonna have one -- -- and that's guilty.
He sounds like has a pretty good case to be brought to come back and say your rotten to the agency not to the federal court.
You're wrong on mr.
wrong on -- you're wrong -- that to bring -- -- it is on witness is he doesn't have just to capitulate and say I didn't I didn't.
But you know the charges are very serious stuff I'm not there -- talk about right let's talk a little bit about -- agency though right -- -- worry agency -- -- think it's a government agency.
It's not a government agency now technically go -- more than half of it is funded by federal money right.
Possibly -- -- -- -- 2000 by congress saying that this government agent this -- like government wise I was like government agency which is -- not a real government agency.
The can be established so that they can look into doping in Olympic sports cycling is Olympic sport.
And so but they're not the end all be all authority -- -- not incite -- and the and the point is that it is doping and what Lance Armstrong's when his -- got taken five or 600 test.
Every single time.
Nothing has found wrong with their charges being brought forward doping that being brought by conspiracy by other people saying Lance on the other people even though all of his chest pass the other people -- out.
Had offered their testimony.
In exchange for not being in trouble themselves right.
And we call those kind of stitches in the criminal world which as you know and and moderate or another wanted to be your from abroad to -- well making a -- and unless they're doing Lance Armstrong have a -- -- is here's what happened I think.
The lawyers his lawyers tried to circumvent the quasi government process of going to the federal judge -- this eighty page thing and -- Look at all this and dumping the kitchen -- and and the second Lance go through the quasi government process go through the agency -- -- witnesses have your lawyers go through that and if you're not happy -- happens there then appeal -- -- a final question -- Chad.
This -- in years and the Justice Department had a two year investigation decided not had a case against Lance Armstrong you mention hundreds of test cities taken.
At a certain point.
Where does this end and part of what glances.
Attorneys are arguing is this is outcome warranted for a vendetta that they top officials have against Lance Armstrong was looking that was a criminal process and we all know that that's a higher bar beyond a reasonable doubt for criminal proceeding this is not a criminal -- this is a civil proceeding which is a much slower learn -- -- I don't let the process so far and.
Heard a big vendetta as to what we found out that it was the doping agency that was providing the prosecutors with all the information.
That are on -- and it's -- out there -- and they decided not that many criminal prosecution he didn't violate the criminal law criminal law and he never failed a blood right.
Well we'll see where it goes Tuesday telling a second day of the week there could be a whole bunch of different things that glances team could actually offer this judge this week in Texas thank you both.
Thanks -- -- CBO -- this season and.
Filter by section