Kimmage unleashes hell, counter-sues Verbruggen & McQuaid

[thirteen]

Just googled her and can't find anything so what is your problem?

From reading the thread it appears you are a friend of Paul Kimmage, some woman called Lesli (who parents obviously can't spell) who has a site called Cyclmas, someone from nyvelocity called Andy Shen and perhaps a guy called Aaron Brown.

If you do know any of them help us out and ask them what is going on and post it here.

As I have learnt more than I need to know about US non profits help us out..

I assume from the name Digger you are Australian so start digging!

Anna Zimmerman's blog (that was linked to in the article -- you obviously searched really hard): http://150wattsofawesome.blogspot.be

Digger is under no obligation to share with you or any of us what he does know. there's a lawsuit going on, capiche?

 

[Benotti69]

Just googled her and can't find anything so what is your problem?

From reading the thread it appears you are a friend of Paul Kimmage, some woman called Lesli (who parents obviously can't spell) who has a site called Cyclmas, someone from nyvelocity called Andy Shen and perhaps a guy called Aaron Brown.

If you do know any of them help us out and ask them what is going on and post it here.

As I have learnt more than I need to know about US non profits help us out..

I assume from the name Digger you are Australian so start digging!

I assume from this post you are trolling.

 

[zigmeister]

Can we stop calling it the Kimmage Defense Fund and start calling it the Aaron Brown Fund.

ROFL...finally...someone gets it!

 

[zigmeister]

two new articles, based on the interview Kimmage gave earlier this evening: Irish Times and The Score.

from the latter:

Can Kimmage stop with all the boo-hoo and how dis-enchanted he is with cycling (again)?

Why is he so surprised this has happened? Oh wait, now he doesn't want to have anything to do with cycling...oh OK, this was the final straw. I get it.

He stated at the start he never wanted money...obviously, he did!! He was trying to be humble I suppose.

On the other hand, he is welcome to counter-sue the UCI for a frivalous lawsuit, (at least in the US you can), and get his money back from defending himself from the lawsuit. Which hasn't been paid, or just partially paid fees, to any lawyers according to him.

I know, just as confusing right?!?!

 

[timmers]

Anna Zimmerman's blog (that was linked to in the article -- you obviously searched really hard): http://150wattsofawesome.blogspot.be

Digger is under no obligation to share with you or any of us what he does know. there's a lawsuit going on, capiche?

Thanks. Just skimmed the last post on the blog and couldn't see anything relating to Kimmage. But the the blog was pretty dizzy so that could be the problem.

Well this is the internet so there is no liability so if he knows nothing don't post! If he does do. You can't be sued for telling the truth or what you assume to be true! Well you can be but this would be your defence!

 

[timmers]

I assume from this post you are trolling.

Thanks for your unhelpful post. I have reported it as offensive!

 

[The Hitch]

Anna zimmerman, isn't that the muppett schleck fangirl who claims schleck got spiked while ranting against some secret society of Contador Armstrong fans (when did those 2 ever go together) who are running things.

that blog isn't worth the 2kb of a word file the posts are originally written on.

Fränk Schleck tested positive for a banned diuretic that is not performance-enhancing but the only possible explanation is that he is doping and, oh hey, let’s not forget that four years ago he wrote a check to the bad doping doctor, Dr. Fuentes, and, even though he was declared innocent of doping charges, let’s continue to believe that he doped because obviously those proceedings and judgments made by the anti-doping authorities are crap. Get those doping cheats out of our peloton now. Burn them at the stake. Everyone who has ever been within one mile of anyone else who has ever come within arms’ length of someone with a doping suspicion should be presumed a doper and banned from the entire peloton now. Once a doper, always a doper.

As to prior incidents that may strengthen a doping allegation, yes in 2006, Fränk Schleck wrote a check for €7,000 to Dr. Fuentes, the most infamous doping doctor in Europe, but in 2008, he was found innocent of anti-doping violations. How is a rider ever to be free of doping accusations if the general public refuses to believe findings of innocence, or in the case of Alberto Contador, findings of guilt? Fränk Schleck was found innocent of the Dr. Fuentes matter. That decision must be respected.

 

[thirteen]

Thanks. Just skimmed the last post on the blog and couldn't see anything relating to Kimmage. But the the blog was pretty dizzy so that could be the problem.

Well this is the internet so there is no liability so if he knows nothing don't post! If he does do. You can't be sued for telling the truth or what you assume to be true! Well you can be but this would be your defence!

i posted a link earlier that was written by her about Kimmage and was what everyone was commenting on. i posted her blogspot because you claimed you could not find her on the internet. i had assumed you read the first piece, my bad... you seem to want to be spoon fed.

as far as no liability by posting on the internet, look around. there is.

 

[Digger]

Anna zimmerman, isn't that the muppett schleck fangirl who claims schleck got spiked while ranting against some secret society of Contador Armstrong fans (when did those 2 ever go together) who are running things.

that blog isn't worth the 2kb of a word file the posts are originally written on.

This post here is exactly what i am thinking. She is a johnny come lately. Is obsessed with all things Schleck, and for some bizarrre reason has developed a following based on her thoughts. It makes no sense. Her blogs offer nothing of note. This one, outside of the screenshots which we knew about already, again just goes around in circles endlessly. She also fails to address that AB, even if the money turned up now, has behaved disgracefully towards Kimmage and Lesli. He stayed in Paul#s house two weeks ago for example.

As for the guy above who tells me to start digging. Firstly i am irish. Secondly, do your own research. I was involved in the setting up of it. I was notified about this stuff on Monday and told the media had got wind of it. It was on this site on Tuesday. I can also categoorically say that Lesli, Andy or Paul were not the ones who notified the media of an issue.

 

[hrotha]

Anna zimmerman, isn't that the muppett schleck fangirl who claims schleck got spiked while ranting against some secret society of Contador Armstrong fans (when did those 2 ever go together) who are running things.

that blog isn't worth the 2kb of a word file the posts are originally written on.

Well yes, those quotes are ridiculous.

But as for the article on the Fund, I don't see what's the problem with it.
edit: and personally I think any bandwagon has more to do with her Armstrong posts than with anything else.

 

[thirteen]

Anna zimmerman, isn't that the muppett schleck fangirl who claims schleck got spiked while ranting against some secret society of Contador Armstrong fans (when did those 2 ever go together) who are running things.

that blog isn't worth the 2kb of a word file the posts are originally written on.

Anna's the one who got spammed by one of our resident trolls pretending to be us

(that smiley face is because "my" post, if i remember rightly, was littered by them... think it was about LA but i can't be ar$ed to go find it.)

but back to the point, why the feck did Lesli put Anna's piece up on Cyclismas?

 

[gooner]

Anna zimmerman, isn't that the muppett schleck fangirl who claims schleck got spiked while ranting against some secret society of Contador Armstrong fans (when did those 2 ever go together) who are running things.

that blog isn't worth the 2kb of a word file the posts are originally written on.

I read a couple of her blogs and find nothing ground breaking in anything she writes and if anything inconsistent like you said with her defence of Frank Schleck and criticism of others. I always wondered why she is held in esteem by many as I only came to hear of her through her conversation on twitter with Lance. It also seems from what I'm reading that she only came into following the sport as soon as 2010 which is strange as most of her writing is on Lance and stuff that happened when she wasn't following the sport.

My opinion is that she's living off her twitter conversation with Armstrong and I still don't how that gave her the recognition of an esteemed blogger whose word we should all hang on and whose opinion carries more weight than others.

 

[The Hitch]

Well yes, those quotes are ridiculous.

But as for the article on the Fund, I don't see what's the problem with it.
edit: and personally I think any bandwagon has more to do with her Armstrong posts than with anything else.

The point is how the **** does she get to write for cylismas.

Doping is one problem. The fact that the most ignorant fans like her or tan get to rise highest, or that ligget hasn't been thrown out from the sport in disgrace and is still seen as some sort of father figure, is another fatal flaw.

 

[Rusty Bike]

Can Kimmage stop with all the boo-hoo and how dis-enchanted he is with cycling (again)?

Why is he so surprised this has happened? Oh wait, now he doesn't want to have anything to do with cycling...oh OK, this was the final straw. I get it.

He stated at the start he never wanted money...obviously, he did!! He was trying to be humble I suppose.

On the other hand, he is welcome to counter-sue the UCI for a frivalous lawsuit, (at least in the US you can), and get his money back from defending himself from the lawsuit. Which hasn't been paid, or just partially paid fees, to any lawyers according to him.

I know, just as confusing right?!?!

The guy has been tortured for his anti doping stance for the last 20 years. He has got nothing but grief for pointing out some obvious faults in cycling. He then gets the chance to get out (most people would have left for the quiet life) but instead goes back into the mix.

Its easy to pick at certain aspects but I believe Paul Kimmage has done everything he can to better the mess of pro cycling

 

[Ferminal]

So no one can explain the Paypal screenshots?

 

[northstar]

Some new figures from the AZ blog.

The PK fund raised $93K and $23K was paid to the Swiss lawyer leaving a balance of $70K. Let’s assume $5K is deducted for Paypal fees/other bank fees = $65K in fund. A report yesterday said AB provided a screenshot of a Paypal account in his name of $64,800. If that’s legit, AB should transfer the money to Paul’s lawyer and Paul could provide AB with some sort of indemnification to pay any tax owing in the future, if necessary.
.

 

[Race Radio]

There are a few things I don't understand from this latest piece

Kimmage request makes sense

Mr. Kimmage claims only 21,000CHF ($22,800) has been distributed to him and he wants the Defense Fund transferred to a trust account managed by his attorney in Switzerland, or a neutrally-controlled escrow account. Even though Mr. Kimmage is not actively engaged in a lawsuit with the UCI, this doesn’t preclude other legal action from being taken against him in the future.

As has been discussed multiple times here this is achievable with no tax liability to Brown or Leslie

This next part is confusing. So people were paid with money from the fund? I can't understand how that would be OK.

Approximately $5,700 was paid to Cyclismas employees and vendors who didn’t know they were being paid with Defense Fund money

Brown is complaining about trail by media. If I was in his position and did nothing wrong I would be angry too.....But it seems that this would be easy to clean up if all the facts are correct

 

[martinvickers]

Leslie, Paul, Andy and Digger did a good job drawing attention and raising funds. Unfortunately they trusted the management of the fund to Brown.

It seems clear that Lesli, Paul, and Andy did a great job....Brown however has done a horrible job of managing his part of the fund.

To ascribe the questionable actions of one person to a group who worked hard with good intentions is silly.

Unfortunately, in many jurisdictions, its also the law, by dint of the rules of partnership, and trust.

And you can't ignore that because you don't like it, or think it's 'silly'. Indeed, the move to dissolve the partnership, and hire an attorney suggests people in the middle of this know this.

It is one horrible mess. I hope Paul gets the money. I certainly don't want my contributions back.

But, more generally, people should maybe heed the lessons of this going forward, for those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

And maybe, just maybe, it would be good if people stopped thinking displaying their temper about this was impressive. It really isn't, and it doesn't help.

 

[martinvickers]

There are a few things I don't understand from this latest piece

Kimmage request makes sense


As has been discussed multiple times here this is achievable with no tax liability to Brown or Leslie

This next part is confusing. So people were paid with money from the fund? I can't understand how that would be OK.



Brown is complaining about trail by media. If I was in his position and did nothing wrong I would be angry too.....But it seems that this would be easy to clean up if all the facts are correct

That's the hub of the matter. Funds that shouldn't have been mingled were. All the rest of the crap that follows, follows from that original misstep.

It's all very depressing.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

I read a couple of her blogs and find nothing ground breaking in anything she writes and if anything inconsistent like you said with her defence of Frank Schleck and criticism of others. I always wondered why she is held in esteem by many as I only came to hear of her through her conversation on twitter with Lance. It also seems from what I'm reading that she only came into following the sport as soon as 2010 which is strange as most of her writing is on Lance and stuff that happened when she wasn't following the sport.

My opinion is that she's living off her twitter conversation with Armstrong and I still don't how that gave her the recognition of an esteemed blogger whose word we should all hang on and whose opinion carries more weight than others.

She is like most of the posters here then..some even newer.

 

[Ferminal]

Better than starting to follow the sport 1999-2005

 

[Netserk]

Better than starting to follow the sport 1999-2005

That was not nice

 

[Rusty Bike]

Ok this a bit off topic, apologies. Was their a clinic type forum around the 1999-2005 period? That must have been fun. PM me if you dont want to talk off kimmage topic but quite interested about what was going on around that era online

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Unfortunately, in many jurisdictions, its also the law, by dint of the rules of partnership, and trust.

And you can't ignore that because you don't like it, or think it's 'silly'. Indeed, the move to dissolve the partnership, and hire an attorney suggests people in the middle of this know this.

It is one horrible mess. I hope Paul gets the money. I certainly don't want my contributions back.

But, more generally, people should maybe heed the lessons of this going forward, for those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

And maybe, just maybe, it would be good if people stopped thinking displaying their temper about this was impressive. It really isn't, and it doesn't help.

You're doing that lawyer thing here, and that isn't what RR is talking about. He is addressing the concerns of the general public, not the legal concerns. He is fully aware there are legal implications to forming partnerships and the like. Nobody is taking issue with the legal issues related to their undertaking. He (and I) am taking issue with the suggestion by some here that legal responsibility = personal condemnation of those who are legally implicated in something that they started having ONLY good intentions.

Unfortunately, one of the people involved appears to have had mixed intentions at best.

There are two realities here:

1. You should never undertake something like that without fully addressing the legal issues upfront. If I remember correctly, I was asked for a legal opinion about what to do when the fund was being created, and my answer was "I am a law student, you need to talk to an attorney" or some answer along those lines. I wish they had consulted a real attorney.

2. There is also the reality that some really good people decided to help out someone who needed help because they were being maliciously sued by an entity with significant financial backing. No good deed goes unpunished indeed. That they did not proceed in a legally advisable manner is not too surprising because navigating those issues is a complex thing best left to attorneys, but I can't say they deserve condemnation for that. Looking at the money they had initially, I don't think hiring an attorney was a real option. I do wish some attorney had volunteered to help, but nobody did.

Lastly, attorneys get hammered all the time for being useless scum-suckers devoid of any redeeming value. While that may be true, they can also be useful sometimes.

 

[thirteen]

That was not nice

yeah, but it made me laugh!