Lance Armstrong case
The board of directors leaked the company’s information putting the company in trouble. An investigation was ordered in two phases into the board room leaks which was concluded in mid September 2005 after failing to unearth the source of the leaks. More confidential information was leaked in 2006 leading to more investigations. After the second investigations a report was given listing the techniques applied and the sources leaking the company’s information. Underpinning facts
Doping and use of performance enhancing drugs is totally banned in all fields of sports. Many accused Lance Armstrong of using performance enhancing drugs that enabled him to win so many titles, prizes and awards. Armstrong would ride alongside Bassons and at one point he pulled over to talk to him and that Armstrong had interest to know what Bassons was doing. That was during the 1999 Tour de France (Macur, 2012). Lance Armstrong had an argument with Bassons over this article. There was medical certificate which showed Armstrong used cream approved for the saddle sores containing the substance of Corticosteroids traces found from his 1999 urine sample, though Armstrong denied this (Vertuno, 2012). In 2003 – 2005, Armstrong was working with Michele Ferrari as his trainer. Previously, Michele Ferrari was convicted of using or facilitating the use of performance-enhancing drugs. Their professional relationship was doubted by many including Greg LeMond and Jean-Marie Leblanc the organizer of Tour de France. They said they were disappointed by their relationship. Armstrong later dismissed Michele saying that he can’t work with someone who has been convicted in the use or facilitation of performance –enhancing drugs. Later, Armstrong denied that Michele had never suggested, introduced or provided him with any performance – enhancing drugs. In 2004, a book was published by Pierre Ballester and David Walsh alleging Armstrong on using performance-enhancing drugs. The book contained allegations by Armstrong’s former masseuse, she made allegations that “Armstrong asked her to dispose of used syringes and to give him makeup to conceal needle marks on his arms” (Macur, 2012, Pg. 1). Contained in the same book, it says that Armstrong started using drugs in 1995 while as a member of the Motorola team. This allegation has been denied by other team members and Armstrong too (Goldberg, 2012). In May 2010, a former U.S. Postal teammate had accused Armstrong of doping and claimed that the former Team director bribed former UCI president to keep quiet about a positive test. The UCI admitted it but this allegation was dismissed because there was no documentation that supported it. In 2012, USADA (United States Anti-Doping Agency) laid evidence in the court whereby statements were taken from his former team mates; all of whom confessed to doping during their careers. In October 2012, UCI announced that it would not appeal USADA's recommendations to the court, showing acceptance to USADA's recommended sanctions to ban Armstrong from sports for life and stripping him all his titles since August 1, 1998. Ethical issues
Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) was the final body that had the final answer to all decisions made by the court rulings. The first investigation was carried out by U.S Federal Prosecutors led by Jeff Novitzky (a Federal agent) and officials from France, Belgium, Spain, and Italy. It failed on its investigations on allegations made by U.S. federal prosecutors of doping by Armstrong from 2010 to 2012. When the investigation failed the case was dropped by the U.S Federal prosecutors and the US Attorney André Birotte (Frieden, 2012). USADA picked up the investigation after it was dropped by the US Federal Prosecutors. In June 2012, USADA accused Armstrong of trafficking and doping of drugs, citing evidence from the blood samples in 2009 and 2010, and witnesses’ testimonies...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document