BDF Posted January 26, 2016 Share Lets not forget the bigger picture here: David George: Busted for doping, negatively affects the sport.Brandon Stewart: Busted for doping, negatively affects the sport.Kevin Evans: Busted for doping, negatively affects the sport.Rourke Croeser: Busted for doping, negatively affects the sport ZK, hurt their feelings.... we flame HIM? The logic astounds me.Just added one... fandacious and Captain Fastbastard Mayhem 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tumbleweed Posted January 26, 2016 Share As the question posed clearly said "had the matter progressed to trial" how will KE make his case without an affidavit or testimony ? He wouldn't necessarily have to. The plaintiff would have to provide evidence of the truthfulness of his statements. The matter would never have gone to court other than to get a court order for a take-down notice. The extent of damages would probably have been too slight to bother suing for defamation. Let's say the matter did go to court stemming from the original letter and hadn't been resolved by the time of the SAIDS announcement. Would the court have entertained the introduction of the announcement as new evidence? Don't think so. Captain Fastbastard Mayhem, fandacious and Andrew Steer 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Posted January 26, 2016 Share Again...no horse in this race for me and no favourite either....but when you make fleeting statements about a convicted cyclists riding partner....then the odds are already very thin and with a little bit of logic everyone knows who you are referring to...no need to even mention a name....kinda like a boomerang effect....KE went on a rampage and understandably so...it's human nature to want to defend ourselves and our honour...what I would not have done if I was KE....I would not have gone on that that rampage if I knew that I was actually doping... Then why not do it now? SAIDS and KE should issue more detailed statements. IMO. Consider the given TL, the Emma Letter and the sanctioned ABP start date. As an aside, I see the Old Coot quietly removed his twatter feed. Again.Maybe it was hurting Rush Sports reputation? intern and fandacious 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted January 26, 2016 Share I agree with you a million times over...the bold bit is where I am a little more stubborn....ZK was being flamed because he had no conclusive evidence....ZK might now get flamed again because his motives for being an anti-doping crusader is called in to question....I think in the end of the day...don't dope....don't say stuff in public you might regret....in short...don't be an @$$hole (not referring to you) unless of course we want to be stravasholes.....And, in closing, lack of names is no defence in a defamation suit. Inference is libellous as well. So, ZK - while I applaud you for addressing it, your post was inferring KE. He was the only person it could have been, as has been said before, and you had no proof to back it up - only hearsay and speculation. As valid as that speculation may have been, it's still speculation unless it is provable. That's why you have to be very, very careful when it comes to social media. Always employ the reasonable man test. Logically. fandacious, Tumbleweed, BarHugger and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarHugger Posted January 26, 2016 Share Then why not do it now? I am not sure...maybe because his wife decided to take over... Patchelicious 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldron Posted January 26, 2016 Share Maybe just maybe all parties involved learnt a lesson or two? Edit: In random other news - I just placed an order with Rush :devil: :devil: Edited January 26, 2016 by Eldron Tumbleweed, Captain Fastbastard Mayhem and fandacious 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDF Posted January 26, 2016 Share Just added one...Oh and Daryl Impey: Busted for doping, negatively affects the sport BUT presents an amazing defence and is "UNBUSTED", thereby positively affecting the sport. fandacious, intern and Tumbleweed 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarHugger Posted January 26, 2016 Share Oh and Daryl Impey: Busted for doping, negatively affects the sport BUT presents an amazing defence and is "UNBUSTED", thereby positively affecting the sport.And even there people took to tweeta calling it a load of hogwash and suggested the pharmacist was paid to lie..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor Buttox Posted January 26, 2016 Share And, in closing, lack of names is no defence in a defamation suit. Inference is libellous as well. So, ZK - while I applaud you for addressing it, your post was inferring KE. He was the only person it could have been, as has been said before, and you had no proof to back it up - only hearsay and speculation. As valid as that speculation may have been, it's still speculation unless it is provable. That's why you have to be very, very careful when it comes to social media. Always employ the reasonable man test. Logically.Thanks, M, you summed that up perfectly. But that said, I still find a bit of a for the whistle-blower portion of what he did. It must be the hardest thing in the world (to follow through with whistle blowing) - and even if the method was off, I can t fault the conviction. Edited January 26, 2016 by Thor Buttox Captain Fastbastard Mayhem 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissVan Posted January 26, 2016 Share all hubber hate dopers, except when its a SA pro or a mate. Then they will find every excuse under the sun not to crucify the guy. pick a side. Either you hate doping and dopers or you dont. Almost no-one here has any balls. You're all fickle. Everyone calls for a clean sport. But when a local "nice" rider gets busted, then theres a million excuses, stories, diversions. As long as cyclists continue making excuses for dopers we will NEVER have a clean sport I think its because they are more familiar with local "heroes" and are more exposed to them and as a result its more difficult (on average) to treat them like just a name of some unseen pro from eurousaozetc...land. Kind of like if your brother / sister / mother / father gets caught... you might display some form of surprise or shock but would you crucify them? I don't know KE, never met him other than having seen him here and there, been to the shop in Plett and met his old man who i found to be friendly and helpful... so i admit because of this and probably because he represents my home country I'm kind of hoping that there is some sort of logical explanation that will come out and perhaps clear him....however at the same time i'm not entirely naïve nor surprised and shocked and would not loose any sleep if it was all true. andydude 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tumbleweed Posted January 26, 2016 Share Oh and Daryl Impey: Busted for doping, negatively affects the sport BUT presents an amazing defence and is "UNBUSTED", thereby positively affecting the sport. Now that confusing everything. Wasn't Rourke also unbusted for something? Not sure if the effect was positive for the sport though. Then charged for another? Charging athletes is such an ambiguous term... BDF 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Ruinaard Posted January 26, 2016 Share Hmm, and defending his wife for defending him, - assuming she didn't know? Its pretty interesting to see all this now being scrutinised in a very harsh way. Remember Lance's wife and the fact that she knew all along and struggled to live with it and has distanced herself from him in a big way. So there are many other aspects of this sorry tale. If she did know - then she was also implicated. If she didn't know - what else doesn't she know about him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted January 26, 2016 Share Thanks, M, you summed that up perfectly. But that said, I still find a bit of a for the whistle-blower portion of what he did. It must be the hardest thing in the world (to follow through with whistle blowing) - and even if the method was off, I can t fault the conviction.Absolutely. Patchelicious 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Steer Posted January 26, 2016 Share Oh and Daryl Impey: Busted for doping, negatively affects the sport BUT presents an amazing defence and is "UNBUSTED", thereby positively affecting the sport. Would make for a great episode for MythBusters BDF 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissVan Posted January 26, 2016 Share I wonder who the other one or two are.... will it come out before the Epic, or Olympics... is it a mountain biker.... Come on Fand time to move on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarHugger Posted January 26, 2016 Share Hmm, and defending his wife for defending him, - assuming she didn't know? I missed the bit where anyone here defended her....can you point us to those posts ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts