Lemond/McIlvain tape

[Tubeless]

Well, since McIlvain married into a position higher up the Oakley corporate chain, it's easy to assume she's no longer the struggling single mom dealing with a sick child who needs therapy and treatment for his autism.

I think many people have wrongfully believed she was the equivalent of an abandoned Depression-era single mom struggling to get by during hard times when Lemond taped their conversation. I don't think that was the case-

So we can stop feeling sorry for her and get to the points that need clarifying-

1) When did she give the deposition where she lied in the CSA case?

2) What exactly was her employment status at Oakley at that particular time?

3) Was she already married to the Oakley employee when she testified in the CSA case?

CSA are going to want their money back-both the $5 million dollar prize money and the $2.5 million in court costs. I think this time they'll get every penny back and then some.

Re #1, here's a piece that pins her deposition to "late 2005".

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5508863

Same story dates the recorded phone conversation to July 2004.

This article says that Patrick "McIlvain is vice president of global sports marketing at Oakley, Inc. He and his wife, Stephanie, have a 10-year-old son who is autistic." So it would appear that the talk of the "poor single mom" is not accurate.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/04/oakley-sets-sights-on-helping-taca.html

Oakley is privately held so there are no official figures available, but Patrick's Linkedin profile kindly tells us here that Oakley's revenue is north of $1 billion per year.

http://www.linkedin.com/profile?vie...oken=rneu&authType=name&trk=coprofile_popular

Suffice to say the Mcilvaines' are well off. No need to feel sorry for anyone at Oakley - thanks in part to Lance !

 

[thehog]

Re #1, here's a piece that pins her deposition to "late 2005".

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5508863

Same story dates the recorded phone conversation to July 2004.

This article says that Patrick "McIlvain is vice president of global sports marketing at Oakley, Inc. He and his wife, Stephanie, have a 10-year-old son who is autistic." So it would appear that the talk of the "poor single mom" is not accurate.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/04/oakley-sets-sights-on-helping-taca.html

Oakley is privately held so there are no official figures available, but Patrick's Linkedin profile kindly tells us here that Oakley's revenue is north of $1 billion per year.

http://www.linkedin.com/profile?vie...oken=rneu&authType=name&trk=coprofile_popular

Suffice to say the Mcilvaines' are well off. No need to feel sorry for anyone at Oakley - thanks in part to Lance !

I'm very serious when I say this. But you guys need to all get together and put this research into article form. The research undertaken here is better than I've ever read in the press or even Walsh's books. What's needed is a chronology of events.

In addition. The SCA trial was video taped. There was a copy on the internet from the Canadian state broadcaster. Its since been pulled. I've seen it and at the time I wish I saved it to disk. Watching the testimony in particular Armstrongs testimony shows the clear and direct attempt to evade questions. It also brings more context to the others statements at the trial.

 

[Kennf1]

In addition. The SCA trial was video taped. There was a copy on the internet from the Canadian state broadcaster. Its since been pulled. I've seen it and at the time I wish I saved it to disk. Watching the testimony in particular Armstrongs testimony shows the clear and direct attempt to evade questions. It also brings more context to the others statements at the trial.

Are you sure you weren't just seeing a videotape of the deposition? I didn't think the arbitration ever occurred, since there was a settlement following a ruling by the arbitration panel on motions submitted by the parties.

 

[LanceInMyPants]

Fascinating Thread

Excellent work on this subject, everyone who's posted. It seems that everyone involved in this particular charade: Armstrong, LeMond and McIlvain are wealthy and privileged. They all lie and cheat and steal and deceive each other to protect their status and petty interests.

I'd rather be poor, honest and sleeping fine at night than any one of these three. They're all pathetic and useless.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Apparently all's fair in love and doping...
I don't try to disparage anyone, well that's not entirely true, but if you have a bunch of questionable people doing questionable things, using questionable methods to unveil more questionable things that questionable people are doing... Well...
As long as it can evolve into a large enough ****show to create some sort of impetus to FINALLY get doping out of cycling, I have to say I'm all for it!

 

[tockit]

LeMond summers in a guarded resort with Gates and Dan Quayle. I think the assumption that he's rich as hell, based on that, is fairly logical. He was a shareholder who refused to be bought out for 13 million. It's safe to say that his entry fee was more than you or I have in our savings accounts.

Yes, LA is richer than GL. Lance's monthly water bill is more than I earn in a year. That doesn't mean Greg isn't rich.

Sounds like someone has a little 'wealth envy' complex going on ???

 

[thehog]

Are you sure you weren't just seeing a videotape of the deposition? I didn't think the arbitration ever occurred, since there was a settlement following a ruling by the arbitration panel on motions submitted by the parties.

I've seen the tape. Better than Paris. Better than Pamela.

 

[Big Doopie]

i fail to see the problem with lemond taping the conversation.

he has been terribly terribly wronged by someone who cheated, defrauded, who threatened him, and who would stop at nothing in his attempt to destroy him.

i simply have no idea what the fuss is.

 

[Cloxxki]

I agree with Hog (this time).
The knowledge of facts and relationships as well as time lines held by members of this forum needs to be documented in a compact documents, wiki-style.

Are there perhaps wiki-like sites that are not moderated by admins where a docuemnt could be co-written by CN forum members? It would be the ultimate referral for those interested in forgotten fact and their backgrounds.

For instance, I'd want to read the skinny on the 1999 EPO samples, how Lance got out of that. It would be in there, clear, with quotes and links.

 

[NashbarShorts]

For instance, I'd want to read the skinny on the 1999 EPO samples, how Lance got out of that..

Have you read the Ashenden interview on nyvelocity.com? That is everything about the '99 samples, soup to nuts.

 

[Kennf1]

I agree with Hog (this time).
The knowledge of facts and relationships as well as time lines held by members of this forum needs to be documented in a compact documents, wiki-style.

Are there perhaps wiki-like sites that are not moderated by admins where a docuemnt could be co-written by CN forum members? It would be the ultimate referral for those interested in forgotten fact and their backgrounds.

For instance, I'd want to read the skinny on the 1999 EPO samples, how Lance got out of that. It would be in there, clear, with quotes and links.

I believe Cozy Behive has an excellent collection of links, etc. on the subjects.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Have you read the Ashenden interview on nyvelocity.com? That is everything about the '99 samples, soup to nuts.

Here's the link

http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

It should mandatory reading for all fanboys.

 

[uspostal]

I agree with Hog (this time).
The knowledge of facts and relationships as well as time lines held by members of this forum needs to be documented in a compact documents, wiki-style.

Are there perhaps wiki-like sites that are not moderated by admins where a docuemnt could be co-written by CN forum members? It would be the ultimate referral for those interested in forgotten fact and their backgrounds.

For instance, I'd want to read the skinny on the 1999 EPO samples, how Lance got out of that. It would be in there, clear, with quotes and links.

I see you want to know what happened to the 1999 samples.

http://web.archive.org/web/20071201220747/http://www.velonews.com/media/report1999.pdf

 

[Tubeless]

I see you want to know what happened to the 1999 samples.

http://web.archive.org/web/20071201220747/http://www.velonews.com/media/report1999.pdf

It must be pointed out that it has come to light recently that this particular study may have been influenced by a generous "donation" to UCI by Mr Armstrong which coincidentally appears to have happened around the same timeframe.

 

[Race Radio]

I see you want to know what happened to the 1999 samples.

http://web.archive.org/web/20071201220747/http://www.velonews.com/media/report1999.pdf

There is nothing in that link the explains "What happened to the 1999 samples". They did not even attempt to explain how EPO got into the samples but instead used it settle political scores.

No wonder WADA described it

“The Vrijman report is so lacking in professionalism and objectivity that it borders on farcical,” “Were the matter not so serious and the allegations it contains so irresponsible, we would be inclined to give it the complete lack of attention it deserves.”

http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/document/wada_official_statement_vrijman_report.pdf

 

[uspostal]

It must be pointed out that it has come to light recently that this particular study may have been influenced by a generous "donation" to UCI by Mr Armstrong which coincidentally appears to have happened around the same timeframe.

I would then figure it MAY NOT HAVE been influnced by any generous donation by MR. Armstrong .

 

[Tubeless]

I would then figure it MAY NOT HAVE been influnced by any generous donation by MR. Armstrong .

As with Mrs Ilvaine's testimony, we then have two interpretations of the truth. If you're patient enough and wait a few months, we're likely to find out and don't have to debate it now. Check back on this thread in late October?

 

[Race Radio]

I would then figure it MAY NOT HAVE been influnced by any generous donation by MR. Armstrong .

Do you really think the UCI embarrasses itself for free?

 

[Oldman]

Do you really think the UCI embarrasses itself for free?

It's hard to tell if they are embarrassed. They operate on a much lower standard of behavior than most it would appear.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I see you want to know what happened to the 1999 samples.

http://web.archive.org/web/20071201220747/http://www.velonews.com/media/report1999.pdf

Because when you really want to get at the truth the best expert testimony to listen to is that which comes directly from someone who has been hired by a party with direct financial ties to a principal in the case under question.

 

[thehog]

Oh no.......

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-lance-armstrong-20100916,0,2851394.story


Armstrong it like totally fried.

 

[thehog]

Oh no.......

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-lance-armstrong-20100916,0,2851394.story


Armstrong it like totally fried.

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.

The tape recording and transcript of that conversation are expected to be presented to a federal grand jury in Los Angeles looking into charges of widespread drug use in professional cycling, according to sources close to the investigation who are not authorized to speak publicly about it.

Prosecutors have subpoenaed the woman who sources say is Stephanie McIlvain, a longtime liaison to Armstrong for one of his major sponsors, the eyewear company Oakley Inc.

 

[pedaling squares]

Oh no.......

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-lance-armstrong-20100916,0,2851394.story


Armstrong it like totally fried.

Fabricatani is already attempting to insert doubt and suggestions of foul motives. McIlvain may have disavowed the allegation during her deposition but she provided a clear motive for so doing in the conversation. Like all of the evidence against Armstrong, it cannot stand on its own. But all the evidence stacked together makes for a fairly compelling case.

Mark Fabiani, a member of Armstrong's legal team, said, "Greg LeMond's illegal tape is the stalest of all the stale news to emerge from this inquiry so far: Ms. McIlvain disavowed this during her 2005 sworn deposition, and Mr. LeMond violated California law when he made the tape in yet another of his pathetic attempts to settle old cycling grudges."

 

[thehog]

Fabricatani is already attempting to insert doubt and suggestions of foul motives. McIlvain may have disavowed the allegation during her deposition but she provided a clear motive for so doing in the conversation. Like all of the evidence against Armstrong, it cannot stand on its own. But all the evidence stacked together makes for a fairly compelling case.

Yes she was aware that sometime in the future the Feds would look into this case so when talking to LeMond she made up the fact she was in the room.

 

[theswordsman]

Velonation has an interview with Betsy.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5...vement-in-the-Floyd-Landis-investigation.aspx