More on the Betsy Andreu & Lance. Now with Sally Jenkins

[Race Radio]

For the record I did not call either GL or LA a spoiled child, you did. Defending one's self from unauthorized use of likeness is legitimate, which I believe was the deal with Pearl Izumi too. I'm not defending LA but you would have to admit his is a much larger target.

I agree that Armstrong needs to protect his image. I however find it hypocritical that one of the first thing Armstrong's groupies do when they attack Greg is write that he was involved in a few lawsuits....while ignoring Armstrong's much larger number of legal actions. I did not even add the various lawsuits he was involved with his neighbors in Austin.

Just as Lance should protect his image Greg should protect his business interests. In one of his lawsuits Greg won $39 million. I don't know about you but I think that is worth fighting for.

 

[Anonymous]

Just as Lance should protect his image Greg should protect his business interests. In one of his lawsuits Greg won $39 million. I don't know about you but I think that is worth fighting for.

Agree completely.

 

[runninboy]

https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=626A.02&year=2004

After an admittedly quick review of the 2004 statute, it doesn't seem to be much different from 2008.

So exactly what is your point? What is your doubt with the legal system?
How is this relevant?

Iam not a lawyer, but I come from a family with over a hundred years of experience as lawyers. What goes on in a courtroom is decided by a judge.
If someone is asked to produce evidence that would give credibility to their testimony that is entirely possible. It depends on many factors, how the issue is presented, what kind of judge etc etc.

As far as why or why not someone is prosecuted for something, Firstly they were not there to prosecute Greg Lemond.
How do you think the legal system works anyway?
The minute some other issue comes up in court "Ok hold it right there pal, the legality of that tape is in question, lets start another trial, we'll finish this one later"

Who would bring the action against Greg, why would they want to?

This all goes back to people posting the same sort of bs that the legal system magically searches out the people who violate law, hunts them down & punishes them. Therefor only truly innocent people walk the streets.

Before the next person asks "why didn't this happen in the court?" let me make the answer easy for you.

Anyone can sue Anybody for Anything. period.
Whether they are succesful or if the case is even heard is all up to the judge.period.

That is the legal system in a nutshell, I can sue someone for being a clown and using the phrase"bits and pieces" over and over if i so chose. that is my right as an american.
Other people can lie, cheat & steal and never have an action brought against them for various reasons.

Btw, lawyers coach people to hide behind certain phrases and are also pretty good at spotting people avoiding answering questions directly. I have learned this technique secondhand but am not too bad at it.Like
"It all depends what your definition of is is" and
"I tried Marijiuana but didnt inhale" probably means he was eating weed brownies.
"Lance Armstrong never admitted, suggested or indicated that he has ever taken performance-enhancing drugs."
the key to this phrase is the PED, if the question was rephrased to did lance ever admit to taking any kind of cortisoid? and if the dr goes back to the PED statement you have your answer. Ditto with asking him about EPO.PED is a nice way of avoiding the direct question being asked.
This is the way lawyers talk, You ask a question, they find a way to appear to answer the question that actually involves YOU jumping to a conclusion.
A lawyer almost never lies, they find a way to meticulously construct an answer that serves their purpose. You need to find the operative word, phrase etc that is the loophole in the statement of fact.

 

[Anonymous]

I must have said something to tilt liquor-breath, the way he is storming behind me on this thread. Too bad I can't see any of his posts.

Funny, the blatantly obvious fact is that you took me off "ignore," read my post, and then pretended not to have read it in an answer. PM me and I will tell you how I know.

Hey Troll-O-Matic, little hint here, just don't respond at all, its more convincing.

BAWHAHAHAHAHAHAH...

P.S. I have been sober for over 18 years. Maybe it is the clown make-up that throws off your aim?

 

[runninboy]

In jest, huh...

Agreed - asking Lance if he had used PEDs was a very reasonable question for an athlete with Cancer. Dr. Nichols submitted an affadavit. In the affadavit, Dr. Nichols stated "Lance Armstrong never admitted, suggested or indicated that he has ever taken performance-enhancing drugs. Had this been disclosed to me, I would have recorded it, or been aware of it, as a pertinent aspect of Lance Armstrong's past medical history as I always do," Nichols said. "[I]Had I been present[/I] at any such 'confession,' I would most certainly have vividly recalled the fact," Nichols said. "I would have recorded such a confession as a matter of form, as indeed, would have my colleagues. None was recorded."" (http://www.cyclingnews.com/editions/first-edition-cycling-news-for-june-24-2006).



I find it incredible .

Not too hard tofind the operative phrase in this affadavit,
"But you were NOT present were you Dr.Nichols?"
answer would have probably been "i refer you to my affadavit which i stand by completely as a distinguished doctor with many years of experience..."


Come on we can all play the new "Lawyer game!" its fun, its wacky, even a clown can play

 

[scribe]

Funny, the blatantly obvious fact is that you took me off "ignore," read my post, and then pretended not to have read it in an answer. PM me and I will tell you how I know.

Hey Troll-O-Matic, little hint here, just don't respond at all, its more convincing.

BAWHAHAHAHAHAHAH...

P.S. I have been sober for over 18 years. Maybe it is the clown make-up that throws off your aim?

Who are you talking to? You must have misquoted me. I don't care how long you have been sober. What's that got to do with F&B Andreu? Not every thread has to be about you. I could start one for you if you like.

 

[scribe]

There's some really powerful stuff on that tape between Stephanie and Greg. Like where she says the thing that annoys her the most is how he has given so much false hope to people, and that as a mother of a child with a handicap, she found this so hard to stomach. And this is a woman who knew him so well.

That powerful stuff was offset by some of her other observations regarding other people like Hincapie, et al. Look at the reversal on Hincapie in her twitter I posted. Combine all that with the conflicting testimony and stories and you have someone who is simply unreliable, un-credible, and hardly worth a listen to in formulating opinions.

 

[Anonymous]

Who are you talking to? You must have misquoted me. I don't care how long you have been sober. What's that got to do with F&B Andreu? Not every thread has to be about you. I could start one for you if you like.

BAWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH....<breathe><breathe>....BAWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Dang, you got busted and don't have the testicular fortitude to admit it.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Who are you talking to? You must have misquoted me. I don't care how long you have been sober. What's that got to do with F&B Andreu? Not every thread has to be about you. I could start one for you if you like.

TFF invited you to PM him. I'm curious why you didn't just do that instead of hyjacking the thread again. OK carry on everone, sorry to interrupt.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

TFF and Scribe:

Discuss your problem privately, but not in this thread or in this forum at all. The rest of us aren't interested.

Susan

 

[scribe]

Coffeebean if you had any idea about the SCA case, you would know that Betsy said this in jest.
Asking Lance if he had used PEDs was a very reasonable question for an athlete with Cancer. But Nicholls said in his testimony that this was a question which would never be asked. An absolutely nonsensical statement.

Some items are illegal substances. I am not sure I would want to get involved with that as a physician as it has no bearing on the situation going forward.

 

[Anonymous]

TFF and Scribe:

Discuss your problem privately, but not in this thread or in this forum at all. The rest of us aren't interested.

Susan

Yes Headmistress....

 

[Digger]

Some items are illegal substances. I am not sure I would want to get involved with that as a physician as it has no bearing on the situation going forward.

Patient history ring a bell...

Indiana Research Hospital is also a hospital for research.

 

[Digger]

That powerful stuff was offset by some of her other observations regarding other people like Hincapie, et al. Look at the reversal on Hincapie in her twitter I posted. Combine all that with the conflicting testimony and stories and you have someone who is simply unreliable, un-credible, and hardly worth a listen to in formulating opinions.

So do you believe she lied to Lemond, James Startt and to David Walsh?

Secondly, do you believe anyone is telling the truth?

 

[scribe]

So do you believe she lied to Lemond, James Startt and to David Walsh?

Secondly, do you believe anyone is telling the truth?

She lied to one or all of them. Most definitely. I can't take anything she says to the bank.

It seems as if the Andreus are telling the truth, based on everything I have read. But I have already mentioned this several times in this thread.

 

[Epicycle]

That powerful stuff was offset by some of her other observations regarding other people like Hincapie, et al. Look at the reversal on Hincapie in her twitter I posted. Combine all that with the conflicting testimony and stories and you have someone who is simply unreliable, un-credible, and hardly worth a listen to in formulating opinions.

She didn't say she hated George or anything like that on the taped call. I think my friends do some messed up things sometimes but they are still my friends and I wish them well.

I don't see how it's so hard to come to the conclusion she was speaking candidly during the taped phone call about things she was very familiar with.

 

[Digger]

She lied to one or all of them. Most definitely. I can't take anything she says to the bank.

It seems as if the Andreus are telling the truth, based on everything I have read. But I have already mentioned this several times in this thread.

But seriously why would she lie to these people?
Why would she spend four hours on a phone apologising to Betsy for not telling the truth, if she had not heard it.

 

[Digger]

She didn't say she hated George or anything like that on the taped call. I think my friends do some messed up things sometimes but they are still my friends and I wish them well.

I don't see how it's so hard to come to the conclusion she was speaking candidly during the taped phone call about things she was very familiar with.[/QUOTE]

It's mindboggling is what it is.

 

[scribe]

She didn't say she hated George or anything like that on the taped call. I think my friends do some messed up things sometimes but they are still my friends and I wish them well.

I don't see how it's so hard to come to the conclusion she was speaking candidly during the taped phone call about things she was very familiar with.

No she didn't say she hated him. She did say, and I paraphrase 'I wonder what his kids will look like with all the drugs he is on."

And the overriding conclusion from this tape is that these people DO NOT like one another personally or professionally. And are willing to speak it, for what ever reason.

 

[scribe]

But seriously why would she lie to these people?
Why would she spend four hours on a phone apologising to Betsy for not telling the truth, if she had not heard it.

Not credible. Very simply. She can have cried everyday since, for all I care.

 

[Digger]

Not credible. Very simply. She can have cried everyday since, for all I care.

So she's lying?

 

[Epicycle]

No she didn't say she hated him. She did say, and I paraphrase 'I wonder what his kids will look like with all the drugs he is on."

And the overriding conclusion from this tape is that these people DO NOT like one another personally or professionally. And are willing to speak it, for what ever reason.

People talk sh!t about people they don't dislike during candid moments all the time. It's human nature.

 

[scribe]

So she's lying?

When a person claims two different things at different times regarding the same issue, you have to assume she is either not telling the truth or is recollecting them differently. I believe she is doing one or the other.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

She lied to one or all of them. Most definitely. I can't take anything she says to the bank.

It seems as if the Andreus are telling the truth, based on everything I have read. But I have already mentioned this several times in this thread.

Also remember that James Stratt said he had been told by Stephanie on previous occasion that she heard the confession.

Also it is understandable that while she might like the guy she is genuinely worried about what may happen to GH's kids.
Her own son has autism - so she can probably relate a lot more than any of us.

I feel a lot of sympathy for her as - like the Andreus she was put in a position she did not want to be in.

 

[scribe]

People talk sh!t about people they don't dislike during candid moments all the time. It's human nature.

I will accept that it is human nature. People do this at various degrees according to the quality of their character.