Indurain says he still believes Armstrong is innocent

[Tumbleweed]

Yeah yeah good enough if thats what you want to see

 

BUT not quite beyond any doubt as its mostly based on witness testimony and underhand unofficial testing protocols.

 

The real deal would be some bona fida beyond any doubt positive tests of samples

 

You have a point, but, once again, it isn't the smoking gun. Just another part of a body of overwhelming body of evidence.

Edited October 24, 2012 by Tumbleweed

[Tumbleweed]

Go Indurain

 

Hahahahaha!

 

Go salbutamol!

[scotty]

Here's a thought, LA bribed donated funds to UCI, same way sponsors are demanding funds get returned, will the UCI be paying LA back. It is dope money after all

[SwissVan]

what do you mean? the tests showed epo. Thats not based on witness evidence. Thats lab facts

 

Which tests, where in the USADA report can we see the test report and not just a testement of a test.

 

Please not the famous Le Equipe samples that were used for developing a test, they cocked that one up and it does not count.

Edited October 24, 2012 by SwissVan

[Tumbleweed]

Here's a thought, LA bribed donated funds to UCI, same way sponsors are demanding funds get returned, will the UCI be paying LA back. It is dope money after all

 

I asked the same question. If it's "tainted" money, they should. To do so, however, may be an admission of their own guilt and complicity.

[scotty]

Which tests, where in the USADA report can we see the test report and not just a testement of a test.

 

Please not for the famous Le Equipe Ill Equipped samples that were used for developing a test, they cocked that one up and it does not count.

 

Fixed.

[Mellow]

Really, are we back here again.

 

It is hard to find anything in the posted article that hasn't been discussed in length... numerous times. Its almost a matter of same sht different idiot.

Edited October 24, 2012 by Mellow

[eddy]

 

 

BUT not quite beyond any doubt

 

 

 

SV

 

No legal system provides for that.

 

The burden of proof in criminal cases is only "beyond reasonable doubt" and on that basis people go to jail or death row. Expecting what is in essence an administrate sanction to have a more onerous burden is simply unrealistic.

[covie]

Now now Fand calm down and be realistic.

 

I'm not denying it, just would like to have seen some proof of positves instead of a herd of sworn statements.

 

Exactly, to seal this debate they need to provide scientific proof, not go on heresay by tests done out of protocol and if the frenchies got hold of his blood why wont the USADA FDA and FBI not be able too, And the USADA is refering to a matter that has gone through the legalities and Lance was found innocent and no charges were pressed on the dope tests refered to by USADA in their report once again stating that they have 0% scientific evidence to corroborate their witness statements.

 

I could care either way if the man's guilty, i simply want them to conclusivly prove it.

 

And i love the comment by the UCI where they said there will be a black hole in history as they wont be reassigning victories since too many of the other top contenders doped as well. So if your the winner in a pelaton full of dopers and you win them 7 times over, your still the best athelte.

[eddy]

Here's a thought, LA bribed donated funds to UCI, same way sponsors are demanding funds get returned, will the UCI be paying LA back. It is dope money after all

 

No, on both LA's and the UCI's versions the money was donated to combat doping.

 

LA is entitled to his money back as they have failed to perform their side of the contract.

[scotty]

I asked the same question. If it's "tainted" money, they should. To do so, however, may be an admission of their own guilt and complicity.

And....did you get a reply. I would expect those calling for justice and accountability to be supporting the money being given back. Also makes UCI hypocritical in they don't mind accepting the money then slamming the source.

[Azonic]

As a matter of interest, would you pay a speeding fine without the necessary camera evidence but backed by the testimony of others?

 

If over 20 people claim to have seen it, and give testomy that pretty much matches, then most I'll maar have to pay, photo or not.

[DaLoCo]

And some people refuse to accept the obvious... How many times do I have to reiterate that LOTS of people never tested positive but have later admitted doping? What about that do you not understand?

 

 

"His performance never suddenly peaked or changed" ??? You joking right?

 

Tour De France Results:

 

1993: Withdrew

1994: Withdrew

1995: 36th

1996: Withdrew

Near death Cancer

1999-2005: First!

 

Yeah, no major improvement...

Ok...so consensus is that the testing abilities vastly improved after 2006. They had access to all his samples from 1999, and even now have access to his 2005 - 2007 samples under the statute of limitations, and with all these improved methods they still cannot find dope?

 

Just asking....

[SwissVan]

Really, are we back here again.

 

It is hard to find anything in the posted article that hasn't been discussed in length... numerous times. Its almost a matter of same sht different idiot.

 

Idiot(s) huh?

Ball, player

If you cannot respond to the question with some sort of intelligent comment rather say nothing.

 

If over 20 people claim to have seen it, and give testomy that pretty much matches, then most I'll maar have to pay, photo or not.

 

JA but speeding tickets are linked to the ACTUAL speed of the vechile....so if you ask all 20 witnesses what was the actual speed was can they answer truthfully and would they give the same answer?

Edited October 24, 2012 by SwissVan

[DaLoCo]

And btw, the FBI case was basically to prove that LA used federal money to bankroll systematic doping whilst with the USPS team, they dropped the case....and USADA manages to prove it?

 

Fishy methinks?

 

Don't doubt he juiced, but the thread is about Indurain questioning the due process....

[Wayne Booysen]

If over 20 people claim to have seen it, and give testomy that pretty much matches, then most I'll maar have to pay, photo or not.

 

So now, let's take it a bit further. Due to the testimony of others your speed limit imposes a confiscation of your drivers license and a possible jail term. Do you still accept and serve your time?