The civil arbitration in Nov 2005 was called to adjudicate between Armstrong (and his company Tailwind Sports) against SCA Promotions Inc and Ted Lyonhamman Insurance Services. The latter were reluctant to pay out the $5 million bonus due to Armstrong after he won his sixth *consecutive Tour de France, as rumours spread as to his possible use of performance-enhancing drugs.
The insurance company and SCA wanted assurances that he was not doping before paying out, Armstrong wanted his money so, at Armstrong’s insistence, they went to court.
The action was laid at the Dallas County District Court, but Armstrong gave three and a half hours’ evidence in a video recording conducted at the law offices of Herman, Howry and Breen in Austin, Texas. It was made clear to Armstrong that “penalties of perjury attach to this deposition just like they would to a court of law proceeding”.
USADA lists the seven instances of alleged perjury as:
1. That Dr Michele Ferrari, the Italian who USADA accused of being US Postal’s doping mastermind, never prescribed, administered or suggested any kind of a drug or doping programme for Lance Armstrong.
2. That there was nothing in Armstrong’s dealings with Dr Ferrari that would suggest that Dr Ferrari was encouraging other athletes to use performance enhancing drugs.
3. That Armstrong had not had any professional relationship with Dr Ferrari since October 1, 2004.
4. That Armstrong never violated the rules of the UCI or the Tour de France in connection with the Tour de France in 2001, 2002, 2003 or 2004.
5. That Armstrong had never taken any performance-enhancing drug in connection with his cycling career.
6. That Armstrong never knew of Tyler Hamilton using illegal substances when on the same team.
7. That Hamilton did not dope while he was on Armstrong’s team.
The US Attorney’s office in Los Angeles remained tight-lipped last night on whether the damning USADA report will lead to a reopening of the criminal investigation against Armstrong. When asked by The Daily Telegraph whether the USADA report constituted new evidence, a spokesman for the US Attorney’s office in LA said: “We are not commenting in relation to the USADA report.”