Lance Armstrong Banned and Stripped of TDF Titles

[TNT1]

the sand is better than where yours is right now

 

Nice. Carry on.

 

Do you actually have something reasoned and substantial, or are you going to try try bully me away?

[TNT1]

Men. Tyler said in his book that he passed a lie detector test. It's trivial to cheat them.

 

I've beaten them before.

[ThaStig]

Cute.

 

Another personal attack. To what end?

 

Can you play the game/ball/sport, other than attacking me?

Are you crying victim now? after all the personal attacks you've been dishing out throughout this whole thread. When you dish it you must be able to eat it too.

Edited October 14, 2012 by ThaStig

[TNT1]

Are you crying victim now? after all the personal attacks you've been dishing out throughout this whole thread. When you dish it you must be able to eat it too.

 

So, no actual argument then?

 

Makes sense this oke supports Lance. The seem to have the same logic circuit.

Edited October 14, 2012 by TNT1

[Myra]

There unfortunately appears to be a misunderstanding of 'hearsay' by some participants in this thread. The word has popped up a couple of times in relation to the testimony by Armstrongs former teammates etc.

Statements under oath = evidence.

Statements about what someone else said = hearsay.

 

To clarify, if I say under oath that I did something, my statement is evidence. A judge will decide, with reference to all the other evidence, whether it proves something or not. If X says, even under oath, that Y told him that Y did something it is hearsay. It can't be evidence because Y could have lied to X.

[GrumpyOldGuy]

Actually I'm sure the UCI's concern is more than upholding the sanctions, it's must surely also be concerned with what Kimmage can use in his defence against their court action.

 

Haven't heard anything from Ligget either since his rather outrageous statements on the Ballz interview.

 

Yeah, I was actually thinking about that, I haven't heard anything either but from my perspective he has also benefited immensely from been on the LA band wagon, flying around in the Livestrong Jet, paid speaker at Livestrong functions, so he probably has a vested interest in supporting anything LA do's or say's, but I cant believe anyone now takes him seriously.

[scotty]

I think he needs to stop posturing and do things properly, not as suits him. The lawyer/s needs to decide if they're lawyers or PR/Spin doctors FFS.

There's a litany of evidence and information contained in 1000 pages, challenge that instead. But no.

I'ts his money why can he not spend it as he wants.

[TNT1]

I'ts his money why can he not spend it as he wants.

 

Digging a bigger hole?

[petatodd]

What is it with Sunday that the idiots come out to play?

 

Not many brain cells doing the rounds in these big Tex apologists. But it's always like that with blind faith followers.

[TNT1]

What is it with Sunday that the idiots come out to play?

 

 

Saffa tradition of binge drinking?

[scotty]

What is it with Sunday that the idiots come out to play?

 

Not many brain cells doing the rounds in these big Tex apologists. But it's always like that with blind faith followers.

Nice to see you not getting personal.

[ThaStig]

There unfortunately appears to be a misunderstanding of 'hearsay' by some participants in this thread. The word has popped up a couple of times in relation to the testimony by Armstrongs former teammates etc.

Statements under oath = evidence.

Statements about what someone else said = hearsay.

 

To clarify, if I say under oath that I did something, my statement is evidence. A judge will decide, with reference to all the other evidence, whether it proves something or not. If X says, even under oath, that Y told him that Y did something it is hearsay. It can't be evidence because Y could have lied to X.

you are bringing logic to this discussion,big mistake

[eddy]

 

 

To clarify, if I say under oath that I did something, my statement is evidence.

 

And to clarify further, if I say under oath I saw something, my statement is evidence.

 

So, if I saw Lance with a needle in his arm and a bag strapped to the wall and I say so, that is evidence not hearsay and will be assessed as described above.

 

Myra, please comment

[ThaStig]

So, no actual argument then?

 

Makes sense this oke supports Lance. The seem to have the same logic circuit.

there you go again, making assumptions. So because I don't support all your extreme and emotional views I must be a supporter. Clever.

[TNT1]

And to clarify further, if I say under oath I saw something, my statement is evidence.

 

So, if I saw Lance with a needle in his arm and a bag strapped to the wall and I say so, that is evidence not hearsay and will be assessed as described above.

 

Myra, please comment

 

How do you strap a bag of anything to a wall?

[TNT1]

there you go again, making assumptions. So because I don't support all your extreme and emotional views I must be a supporter. Clever.

 

So, once more, with cream and bells on, supply a counter argument that doesn't involve attacking me.

 

PS, Bro, plenty others here found issues with what you said, go dry hump them as well. Why do you save all your loving for me?

Edited October 14, 2012 by TNT1