• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Stephanie McIlvain - what now ?

Feb 3, 2011
20
0
0
I'm not sure she's any more exposed legally than she was October 9. My guess is that it may depend on what she said when she was subpoenaed for the federal investigation. She sure better have told the truth. IIRC, her attorney indicated that her testimony was in favor of Armstrong but I think she was deposed for something like seven hours so we don't really know. I wouldn't be too shocked if she actually told the truth (for once) to the feds but thought it would be best to pretend otherwise. Lance and his minions certainly have a well-documented history of witness intimidation.

That's not to say she didn't perjure herself during the SCA trial. She most definitely did. I doubt she'd be charged with perjury unless Lance is as well. Despite all that we've come to know recently, I'm not so sure it'd be a winnable case unless somebody else comes forward and corroborates that Lance indicated his extensive use of PEDs in that hospital room. We all know he did but I don't see enough out there that substantiates that yet. Sad that it came down to Betsy vs. Stephanie and Betsy was made out to be a liar. This whole thing still makes me so sick. It's hard to have a backbone in this country when those without one always seem to come out ahead.
 
Feb 3, 2011
20
0
0
Just thought of something...didn't she leave Betsy a nasty voicemail along the lines of "I hope somebody breaks a baseball bat over your head...I hope you encounter some real serious problems in your life" and then blame it on having too much wine? It's been a long time since I heard that recording, hope I have it mostly right. Anyhow, if that's right, yes, bring on the perjury charges!
 
Sep 29, 2012
349
0
0
There is also either a recording, or at at least a transcript of the recording, of her threatening Betsy Andreu.
 
Mar 19, 2009
2,235
0
0
I'm telling you, she bore Lance's child.
Only plausible explanation for lying for him under oath, either once or twice. Not even the ultra-loyal USPS domestiques, who have so much to thank him, did not lie for him when it came down to it.
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
Cloxxki said:
I'm telling you, she bore Lance's child.

Only plausible explanation for lying for him under oath, either once or twice. Not even the ultra-loyal USPS domestiques, who have so much to thank him, did not lie for him when it came down to it.
That would be something.
 
Jul 7, 2012
355
0
0
Yes she lied for the sake of Armstrong, Oakley and her job, but she has also revealed that her son is autistic and has said that if her and her husband lost their jobs with Oakley, then they could never afford to pay for all the care and treatment he needs.

It would despicable of Armstrong and Oakley had in any way exploited this fact in order keep her quiet.
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
Robert21 said:
Yes she lied for the sake of Armstrong, Oakley and her job, but she has also revealed that her son is autistic and has said that if her and her husband lost their jobs with Oakley, then they could never afford to pay for all the care and treatment he needs.

It would despicable of Armstrong and Oakley had in any way exploited this fact in order keep her quiet.
It was despicable of McIlvain to compromise her position and her sons care by spilling the beans to LeMond and then threatening Betsy.
 
Oct 2, 2012
140
0
0
Robert21 said:
Yes she lied for the sake of Armstrong, Oakley and her job, but she has also revealed that her son is autistic and has said that if her and her husband lost their jobs with Oakley, then they could never afford to pay for all the care and treatment he needs.

It would despicable of Armstrong and Oakley had in any way exploited this fact in order keep her quiet.
After reading how Lance treated Zabriskie, I wouldn't put anything past him.
 
Jul 7, 2012
355
0
0
Benotti69 said:
It was despicable of McIlvain to compromise her position and her sons care by spilling the beans to LeMond and then threatening Betsy.
Harsh, I feel. Do you have an autistic child who will need care until the day he dies? Do you live in a country where there is no high-quality universal health care for all and where the quality of the treatment that you can get for your loved ones depends on having a good employee insurance plan or what you can afford?

Yes, it might have been easier for her had she said nothing to Lemond, but she didn't think it was been taped and even asked if this was the case first.

Yes, she acted very poorly, but I bet she was desperate and I would still say that the real villains are Oakley and Armstrong for making it clear that her job was on the line if she didn't lie for them.
 
Mar 19, 2009
2,235
0
0
Benotti69 said:
That would be something.
I'm not hoping for that outcome, but worry.
There have been enough innocent futures broken or tainted by Bully Oneball.

It would not excuse Stephanie, but it would explain it.
 
Robert21 said:
Yes she lied for the sake of Armstrong, Oakley and her job, but she has also revealed that her son is autistic and has said that if her and her husband lost their jobs with Oakley, then they could never afford to pay for all the care and treatment he needs.

It would despicable of Armstrong and Oakley had in any way exploited this fact in order keep her quiet.
She should be able to speak out, and with impunity.

While the Texas Whistleblower provisions do not cover private companies, since 2004, Stephanie should be protected under the California Whistleblower Protection Act (Oakley is a California company)

What she should be receiving guidance on, however, is that not only has she committed perjury, but she is arguably an accessory to a conspiracy to commit fraud.

Dave.
 
Oct 26, 2009
644
0
0
Cloxxki said:
I'm telling you, she bore Lance's child.
Only plausible explanation for lying for him under oath, either once or twice. Not even the ultra-loyal USPS domestiques, who have so much to thank him, did not lie for him when it came down to it.
Maybe she had other financial incentives--other than simply her job--to lie for Lance?
 
Oct 8, 2012
233
0
0
ManInFull said:
Maybe she had other financial incentives--other than simply her job--to lie for Lance?


I am sure that people at Oakley would wonder the same thing. A fling? And hiding it from her husband too?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS