messenger Posted September 17, 2010 Share Hope fand and Big Oom get to go at it for a while before the thread is locked.THIS may be exactly what we need on this boring friday morning. For the record - i doped too... but i was still at school and i nearly puked, burnt the hell out of my lungs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldron Posted September 17, 2010 Share Apologies. If a lawyer says so then it simply has to be true. Ok I give up - any case where the witness claims that she has no info, the conversation was taped without the consent of the witness and the only other evidence is that "they" said that the conversation centred around talk of performance enhancing drugs has to be watertight. I stand corrected. Methinks Lancey has more to worry about with the retesting of his famous EPO blood in 1999. Will be interesting to see what the yanks make of his "b" samples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javadude Posted September 17, 2010 Share Isn't there some background missing in this story relating to why she is said to have changed her original story? Didn't "From Lance to Landis" suggest that she feared losing her job - and means for looking after her autistic son - if she testified against Lance? Come on Tumbleweed, if Lance didn't tweet it then its simply not the truth. You can't go believe what people wrote in books now can you, or what people witnessed with their own eyes. Its funny how the Lance fanboys find a way to discredit anyone who has anything to say against their fearless cult leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tumbleweed Posted September 17, 2010 Share Come on Tumbleweed, if Lance didn't tweet it then its simply not the truth. You can't go believe what people wrote in books now can you, or what people witnessed with their own eyes. Its funny how the Lance fanboys find a way to discredit anyone who has anything to say against their fearless cult leader. *Totally admonished, Tumbleweed skulks off to the corner with tail between legs…* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Luke. Posted September 17, 2010 Share Ok I give up - any case where the witness claims that she has no info, the conversation was taped without the consent of the witness and the only other evidence is that "they" said that the conversation centred around talk of performance enhancing drugs has to be watertight. I stand corrected. Methinks Lancey has more to worry about with the retesting of his famous EPO blood in 1999. Will be interesting to see what the yanks make of his "b" samples. Do the FDA have those samples Eldron? I haven't been following this lately. If this woman does testify it will corroborate Betsy Andreu's story.. I'm assuming they heard the same conversation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fandacious Posted September 17, 2010 Share Do the FDA have those samples Eldron? I haven't been following this lately. the story yesterday was that the french lab is prepared to hand them over if asked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
covie Posted September 17, 2010 Share Im with Eldron, wont take a crappy laywer 20 seconds to have whatever is on that tape labeled as inadmissible. Its all circumstanial and based on heresay. And recorded without permission which by default would be considered inadmissable evidence. We have the same law in SA its only legal to record a conversation if you inform the party that the conversation is being recorded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyFrank Posted September 17, 2010 Share Well spotted squire!Yeah ....Eddie the Cannibal is da King. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted September 17, 2010 Share What is it that makes him a tosser?What makes him a nice guy ?He is a has been who can't let go of the past and often creates sensationalism to get his name in lights again.Do you like Julius Malema ?...............somebody does.So to those who think Le Mond is an awesomely and credible ambassador of the sport, well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted September 17, 2010 Share This is a bit I don't like: On the tape, McIlvain asked LeMond whether he is recording the conversation and he said no. Kinda illegal and incriminating towards her privacy, some might even say that she is being "exploited" by the mighty Pope/Le Mond of the cycling world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrumpyOldGuy Posted September 17, 2010 Share Im with Eldron, wont take a crappy laywer 20 seconds to have whatever is on that tape labeled as inadmissible. Its all circumstanial and based on heresay. And recorded without permission which by default would be considered inadmissable evidence. We have the same law in SA its only legal to record a conversation if you inform the party that the conversation is being recorded. Yeah, true, but that do's not stop the judge allowing the tape to be heard if he wants to. Even if its inadmissible, it may show / follow the accused's pattern of behaviour. The Selebi trial was a good example, the judge allowed certain evidence regarding Agliotti (which Agliotti's legal team considered circumstantial) to be heard, as it showed / followed a pattern of events. The USA has a slightly differant legal system, but I imagine the same principle will apply, it can be heard, but its not necessarily allowed to be used against the accused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldron Posted September 17, 2010 Share Come on Tumbleweed, if Lance didn't tweet it then its simply not the truth. You can't go believe what people wrote in books now can you, or what people witnessed with their own eyes. Its funny how the Lance fanboys find a way to discredit anyone who has anything to say against their fearless cult leader. This is Lance's biggest strength - greater than his ability to winner 7 tours - his ability to polarise people. Apparently there are no middlegrounders. Either you pray at the alter of Lance or you're a hater. I get really peeved with this he said - she said bull****. Doctor-patient privacy aside - why don't they just subpoena the doctor? He'll have patient records relating to the meeting. In there it will say (if Lancey said it) that the patient took bucket loads of EPO and was worried that it would affect his cancer treatment. Job done. This whole did he didnt he dope scandal is worse than the faked moon landings and the yankees bombing their own towers put together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Saint Posted September 17, 2010 Share By the sounds of things Lance was addressing a mini conference at that Hospital when he supposedly admitted to using Drugs. **** just how many people were in the room to hear this "confession"? Next thing there will be the hospital floor sweeper who will be testifying that he heard Lance say that he was using PED's - it's a little ridiculous - I could understand an admission comming to Doctors or Close friends but to a SPONSOR of all things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted September 17, 2010 Share By the sounds of things Lance was addressing a mini conference at that Hospital when he supposedly admitted to using Drugs. **** just how many people were in the room to hear this "confession"? Next thing there will be the hospital floor sweeper who will be testifying that he heard Lance say that he was using PED's - it's a little ridiculous - I could understand an admission comming to Doctors or Close friends but to a SPONSOR of all things.He must have been delirious................NOOOOOT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javadude Posted September 17, 2010 Share What makes him a nice guy ?He is a has been who can't let go of the past and often creates sensationalism to get his name in lights again.Do you like Julius Malema ?...............somebody does.So to those who think Le Mond is an awesomely and credible ambassador of the sport, well done. Ja, sensationalist dumb ass. I mean all Trek and Lance were out to do were destroy his lively-hood if he didn't toe the line, i mean seriously what was his problem. So from now on sacrificing everything you've worked for your whole life is called sensationalism. This is official because the fanboys say so. Those of us who call it having a backbone, well, we just don't get it do we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Low Posted September 17, 2010 Share I think LA will be able to dodge this particular bullet, it sounds very tenuous*; but I guess it adds to the mood against him. "Federal prosecutors have obtained a telephone conversation secretly recorded six years ago by three-time Tour de France champion Greg LeMond in which he and a woman close to Lance Armstrong discuss her being present in 1996 when others say Armstrong told his cancer doctors about his use of performance-enhancing drugs." (*he said, she said, maybe baby, but not really,i was kinda there,& all 6yrs ago) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now