By Joseph Ax
NEW YORK, Jan 15 (Reuters) - An admission by Lance Armstrong
that he used performance-enhancing drugs during his cycling
career could create new legal headaches for the former
seven-time Tour de France champion, according to legal experts.
USA Today and other media said on Monday that Armstrong
confessed to doping in an interview with Oprah Winfrey to be
aired later this week, and the talk show host confirmed the
reports on Tuesday on "CBS This Morning."
The U.S. Justice Department, which abandoned a two-year
criminal probe into Armstrong last year without bringing
charges, could decide to take a fresh look after any admission,
though experts deemed that unlikely.
But several civil lawsuits, including a federal
whistleblower case filed by former teammate Floyd Landis, would
be bolstered by the Texan's admission, they said.
"On one side of the ledger are the legal consequences and
the financial exposure, and on the other side are the public
relations consequences," said Geoffrey Rapp, a law professor at
the University of Toledo in Ohio. "I think he's made the
decision that the value of his name, and salvaging something
from that, exceeds the legal costs."
Armstrong was stripped of his Tour de France titles and
banned from cycling after the U.S. anti-doping agency, USADA,
issued a damning report in October detailing reams of evidence
that Armstrong had masterminded a sophisticated doping ring for
himself and his teammates.
His sponsors, including Nike and Anheuser-Busch, which had
stood by him through years of accusations that he steadfastly
denied, began deserting him soon after the USADA report.
Unlike other sports stars who have been prosecuted in
connection with doping, such as track star Marion Jones and
baseball slugger Barry Bonds, Armstrong seems to be safe from
perjury or false statement charges, according to legal experts.
His last recorded testimony under oath that he did not use
performance enhancers appears to be in a 2005 arbitration case
involving a dispute over whether he should receive bonus money
in light of doping allegations. The statute of limitations for
perjury has expired.
It is not known whether he spoke to federal investigators
during their probe.
"Without knowing the details of the interview, it is
difficult to read the tea leaves regarding the implications of
his admissions," said Matthew Rosengart, a former federal
prosecutor. "But it is reasonable to assume that the
exposure would likely fall within the civil rather than in the
criminal arena."
Andrew Stoltmann, a Chicago lawyer who has represented
professional athletes, said if Armstrong confessed, he was
running the risk that the government might reconsider a criminal
fraud case.
"Why poke the bear?" he said.
Armstrong faces a number of civil claims in addition to the
Landis whistleblower case, which accuses Armstrong of defrauding
the government by accepting tens of millions of dollars in
sponsorship money from the U.S. Postal Service.
The London-based Sunday Times has sued Armstrong over
approximately $500,000 it paid him to settle a libel lawsuit
stemming from a story accusing him of doping. A Dallas-based
company, SCA Promotions, has threatened to sue him to claw back
$7.5 million it paid him in bonuses for his Tour de France wins.
In both of those cases, experts said, Armstrong's admission
would make it harder to mount a defense.
The biggest danger lies with the whistleblower case, said
Matt Orwig, a former federal prosecutor. The False Claims Act,
under which the suit was filed, allows whistleblowers to sue on
behalf of the government for a percentage of the recovered
funds.
Such cases typically gain momentum if the government joins
as a plaintiff, a move several media outlets reported is growing
likely, and the damages can be tripled under the law. If
Armstrong's admission prompts the Justice Department to step in,
he would face a steep uphill battle, Orwig said.
"The difference between a case in which the government
intervenes and one in which they don't is enormous," he said.
"It's a whole different ballgame."
One legal issue unlikely to affect Armstrong is lawsuits
filed by angry sponsors to recover money they paid him, Rapp
said. While most contracts have morality clauses, sponsors
rarely if ever sue athletes for damages; disgraced stars like
golfer Tiger Woods haven't faced such claims, for instance.
Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook