I know it's been mentioned in a couple of threads, but my understanding of what exactly was said, and the legal implications of this is poor: What are the legal consequences of Landis' going back on his claim of innocence seeing as it all went to court and he swore under oath that he hadn't taken steroids for the 2006 TdF?
He did claim that, though he had take steroids before, he hadn't taken them during the 2006 TdF...which kind of covers his back (but is obviously a little bit difficult to believe seeing as his blood epitest/test measurements were off)
But anyway, can he get investigated himself and tried in criminal court for almost going back on his claims? Should he?
Sorry if this has appeared somehwere in the depths of the Landis Letter thread - it's tooooooooooo long now!
He did claim that, though he had take steroids before, he hadn't taken them during the 2006 TdF...which kind of covers his back (but is obviously a little bit difficult to believe seeing as his blood epitest/test measurements were off)
But anyway, can he get investigated himself and tried in criminal court for almost going back on his claims? Should he?
Sorry if this has appeared somehwere in the depths of the Landis Letter thread - it's tooooooooooo long now!
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram