Emma O'Reilly Responds to Strickland article.

[mewmewmew13]

Good to hear from you! Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences.

Since it wouldn't be a negative thing, would you mind sharing the names of the four ethical journalists you've found? I'd like to keep them on my radar screen so I can stay informed.

++1 and the same sentiments from me too. My first thought was also 'who are these wonderful four...?' but it may not be in your best interest or beneficial to actually name names. In my opinion one can never be too trusting about divulging anything personal on a public forum.
Anyway, thanks for the post.

 

[dancing on pedals]

Any viewer of eurosport (David Duffield/ English transmission) will recall his take on the events, during the 1999 Tour, which ran along the lines of "there have been articles in the french press suggesting that Armstrong has tested positive for cortizone - however the amount is so small it is below the illegal level, the cortizone probably came from an over the counter saddle sore ointment bought, quite legally in Spain, for which a back dated prescription, by a doctor, was produced when they realised the contents of the ointment"

Indeed, I don't think anyone disputes the fact that the prescription was back dated - it was well recorded in the media at the time.

I believe that Miss O'Reilly's account of the events are very credible and these are backed (though not proven) by contemporary scources.

In my opinion there is no reason to give Armstrongs version of events any more credance than hers especially since her story has remained consistent throughout.
Thanks

 

[Adamastor]

Coming back to Emma's comments, it struck me she was not too positive about Walsh's behaviour, after he had interviewed her. As Betsy has been following this thread, would she emit the same opinion about Walsh's work methods? To me, 3 journalists were key to Armstrong's actual situation (I mean he might not be under investigation today without their articles and comments): Walsh and Ballester (sunday times articles and LA Confidential book), Damien Ressiot (L'Equipe). It is known these guys went through hell to obtain their data, and sometimes, as I understand, got their facts through dubious ways.

Now my question: would Lance ever have been exposed without those 3 men? Obviously it would maybe have meant less trouble and hassle in Miss O'Reilly's and Mrs Andreu's private lives for the last 6 years too.

 

[M Sport]

Now my question: would Lance ever have been exposed without those 3 men? Obviously it would maybe have meant less trouble and hassle in Miss O'Reilly's and Mrs Andreu's private lives for the last 6 years too.

I would say the trigger point was Floyd's confessions. That's not to take away from the work others have done over the years.

 

[Adamastor]

I would say the trigger point was Floyd's confessions. That's not to take away from the work others have done over the years.

Good point, but maybe Floyd wouldn't have made his allegations, as maybe in cycling history Lance would have stood as Mr Clean...

 

[elizab]

A couple of things:

*There are some fantastic journalists who have been "on it" the past few years to whom the truth matters and they've been reporting as such. Four of these journalists I hold in high regard because they cared about this when it wasn't in vogue, when it was unpopular to question the myth.

*As far as Le Troll, there is no problem with me. At times he's not the best at correspondence but we all have a lot on our plates. I don't want to speak for Emma but I'll say it's incredibly annoying that the perception is that some in the media (and I am NOT talking about David) don't give a rat's **** about the consequence of what happens to us once they've done their piece. To do an interview takes time and effort and usually we've been screwed for merely trying to clear our names. Some journos genuinely care, others just want their story without regard for our concern.

 

[flicker]

A couple of things:

*There are some fantastic journalists who have been "on it" the past few years to whom the truth matters and they've been reporting as such. Four of these journalists I hold in high regard because they cared about this when it wasn't in vogue, when it was unpopular to question the myth.

*As far as Le Troll, there is no problem with me. At times he's not the best at correspondence but we all have a lot on our plates. I don't want to speak for Emma but I'll say it's incredibly annoying that the perception is that some in the media (and I am NOT talking about David) don't give a rat's **** about the consequence of what happens to us once they've done their piece. To do an interview takes time and effort and usually we've been screwed for merely trying to clear our names. Some journos genuinely care, others just want their story without regard for our concern.

Like WSJ, SI, Outside, Magazine, JUMO, LEquipe,Walsh,Kimmage, Journalists, selling paper, ads etc.