follow me on Twitter

    Monday, October 25, 2010

    News report suggests reason behind Armstrong's guilty plea

    A report in today's Richmond News suggests that Jim Armstrong pled guilty to charges of distributing fake erectile dysfunction pills with intent to mislead or defraud, because it was a condition of his son Gregory receiving a plea agreement.

    Reporter Alan Campbell writes: When contacted this week by the News, Armstrong declined to comment on the guilty plea until after the sentence is passed down in January.

    Armstrong did indicate, however, that the U.S. prosecutor’s offer to reduce the charges against his son, Gregory, was conditional on Jim also pleading guilty.


    This fits with an opinion expressed to me by Gerry Peckham that Jim "was put in an impossible situation and virtually had no choice."

    The Canadian Curling Association’s chief executive officer, Greg Stremlaw, is quoted by the News as saying he was aware that Armstrong’s plea was struck in terms of his son’s charges.

    “All of our athletes have a code of conduct and we’ll have to determine if (the guilty plea) impacts the codes of conduct in terms of the national team program."  

    You can read the story HERE

    The two separate plea agreements dropped references to trafficking and recommended punishments at the low end of sentencing guidelines in return for guilty pleas and giving up the right to a trial. They are not binding on Judge Martinez, who will issue sentences on January 28th, 2011.

    See earlier post and comments from October 21st.

    20 comments:

    Anonymous said...

    Has not Jim maintained for months that there was more to this story than meets the eye?

    It would appear that we might be getting a sniff of the real issue IF it is true that the Prosecutor's office held out a plea to his son, IF AND ONLY IF he plead as well.

    I guess we won't know until January.

    Such a scheme actually starts to make sense of a nonsense issue.

    Anonymous said...

    Come on. That seems a little too pat an answer. He "had to plea" to minimize his son's exposure? It sounds great, but is it real? Are their two plea agreements public?

    If they say that each is dependent on the other in order to be accepted by the prosecutor, THEN I will accept the story, and it certainly makes sense.

    I just can't believe that the legal system could be so out of whack that Jim's admission of guilt was necessary to minimize his son's risk.

    Bruce Cameron said...

    In the 4th paragraph where Gerry Peckham is quoted as saying Jim was put in an impossible situation reeks of protectionism. Jim was not put in an impossible situation by anybody but himself when he entered that "business"

    Anonymous said...

    I have trouble believing that the US is that low-handed to hold one Armstrong ransom to the other. Is it fact, or fiction?

    Eric, do you have access to the plea agreements?

    Anonymous said...

    I have to agree with the last comment. I did not read any interdependency in the Court's News Release.

    It sounds like a bit of a fabrication on Jim's part.

    Anonymous said...

    You tell the world, Bruce.

    Don't you agree that this "interdependence" of plea sounds a little too pat?

    Anonymous said...

    The only way this "rumour" started was with Jim, himself.

    Anyone actually seen the plea agreements?

    IF IT IS IN THERE, THAT GREG DOES NOT GET A BREAK WITHOUT JIM AGREEING TO PLEAD GUILTY, THEN LET ME BE THE FIRST OF MANY TO APOLOGIZE..............

    I just can not see that happening in the U.S.

    Anonymous said...

    Are the actual plea agreements public knowledge?

    I don't think it is fair that we guess about what is or isn't in the agreement.

    If Armstrong says it was part of the deal, then I would bet that it is.

    Have you seen them, Eric, or do you know if they can be obtained?

    Anonymous said...

    I would have to agree that if Jim was left with the opportunity of minimizing his son's exposure (1 year offered vs 10 years possible if it went to court), it seems like an unfortunate no brainer.

    Anonymous said...

    "can't see that happening in the US"?????

    Where else could you expect a gun to your head??????????????

    Anonymous said...

    WHERE ARE ALL OF JIM'S SUPPORTERS?

    Anonymous said...

    it is unfortunate that he was supporting an illegal activity by his son that was actually being used a source of income. I do not pass moral judgment on others but I would have a hard time trusting his sport ethics if this was a condonable action in his private life. If he let anyone down, he let his son down. His son obviously needed to be parented and receive some good advice and instead was allowed to continue living a life style that involved illegal activity. As a parent myself, this is what dissapoints me, when parents are FRIENDS with their children instead of being PARENTS. This is UNFORGIVEABLE. Get your son treatment, get your son counselling, get him a legitimate job, DO NOT GET HIM DRUGS TO SELL ILLEGALLY.

    Anonymous said...

    And WHAT if he was not aware of the activity?>

    Anonymous said...

    Dude, he was purchasing and transporting fake medication. What did he not know? His son was giving them away to transients because they could not afford the real stuff? Pull youir head out of the sand!

    Anonymous said...

    Dude,

    Jim DID NOT BUY the stuff. That was a recent misprint in one of the articles. That has never come up in six months.

    Yet another sugestion that there have been many discrepencies in this story.

    Anonymous said...

    On numerous occasions, both senior and junior armstrong had picked up packages in the US and transported them back to Canada. So at the very least, if he did not knowingly purchase the product, he knowingly muled it back to Canda for his son to distribute, his original confession says so as reported. So I apologize IF he did not purchase, ONLY transported and contributed to illegal activity. That makes it better, right?

    Anonymous said...

    How did he necessarily know what was in other packages?

    How do we know how many packages?

    If they were all from the US, would they all be the same product?

    If they all came from India, are they the same product?

    If you buy a car in Vancouver, does that say that every purchase you make in Vancouver is a car?


    How do we really know anything, but what, at this point the US government wants to tell us?

    Why is Armstrong not providing his side now?

    Is there another side?

    Is there NOT another side?

    Jim is on record that he will not respond until after January.

    Maybe everyone should not draw conclusions until later?

    Gos knows, the US government couldn't be wrong.

    Anonymous said...

    I have to agree with the lastposter.

    Armstrong has said he will have a statement in January.

    Let's hear what he has to say.

    Anonymous said...

    So, what you are saying is their is a mastermind conspiracy theory at work to dethrone our newly minted paralympic wheel chair curling saviour. This is being done ti allow the rest of the countries a chance to beat us because without Jim armstrong we are only mortals again. I like to think that a human being made a mistake and needs to apologize for making the mistake so we can move on. The apology may not even have to be sincere,(Tiger Woods). If he plead guilty, he is that, guilty. I do not care why or how, guity. Admit you made a mistake and move on, we will and the curling program in Canda will continue to grow and improve because of the athletes in our system. Jim Armstrong will have to find his way in life again but guess what, as do we all.

    Anonymous said...

    So you won't listen to his statement?

    Come on, you are loving this.