Stephanie testifies today

Page 13 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
Polish said:
I vaquely remember a work meeting I was at in 1996, 15years ago. VLSI Technology - custom integrated circuit maker. I seem to recall it was an important meeting. At least at the time it seemed important.

Today, in my minds eye, I can not remember the faces of half the attendees. Cannot remember the names of all of the other half lol. Geez, trying to recall what was said back then is impossible now. C'mon, we are talking about 1996.
First, being in a hospital room with a friend who has cancer is memorable, especially when you hear him admit that he's used a variety of performance enhancing drugs.
I imagine that every time from then on that you hear him say he's clean, you think back to that day. The same goes for when he wins his first Tour de France - it would be natural to remember that day and wonder if this athlete who represents your company is clean, especially when he has a positive test after the very first stage.

Then there are all the times that she had conversations about it since - testifying under oath during a lawsuit, in conversation with LeMond, leaving voice mails of apology to Betsy, etc. She's had plenty of reminders over the years, including testimony from others, conversations with lawyers, etc.

It's not like they inquired about a random event years out of the past. And from the hospital meeting, she should have gained knowledge - that Lance Armstrong is an admitted cheater. You'd think that if she had a conscience, she might pass that info on to her boss at a company that would invest a significant amount of money in his future career. Once you learn that a famous athlete you spend a lot of time with is a cheat, you don't forget the day you learned it.
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
compete_clean said:
Has it occurred to people here that the FDA is really targeting the illegal manufacture, and distribution (to only one person)of unapproved pharmaceuticals?

I presume the FDA already has information, and the testimony, from people involved in the procurement of the custom manufactured material.
Then why would they want 70,000 pages of documents from Greg LeMond's lawsuit against Trek, plus the SCA documentation, plus paperwork from Trek and Nike, plus voice recordings by LeMond and Betsy Andreu?

So, no, it hasn't occurred to me, especially after reading articles about the allegations made by Landis. And I'm pretty sure they don't have grand juries looking into a drug made for one person.

This thread is about Stephanie McIlvain, an Oakley employee. She spent seven hours with the grand jury. Unless you think that Oakley is producing illegal drugs for Lance Armstrong, I'd say you're pretty much not in the ball park.
 
May 11, 2009
117
0
0
Oldman said:
The FDA and USADA, ATF, DEA, Justice Dept and a whole lot of people want to know when someone is manufacturing a drug for potential distribution! You don't have to sell it just be proven to have intent to sell or distribute. If it's new, unproven and coming from foreign shores they are paid to pay attention. The more organized it is the more they'll pay attention.

That a large US corporation would do it is pretty monumental.
Who said anything about it coming from foreign shores?
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
stephens said:
"If that's what he reported me to have said, that's interesting. Unfortunately it's been so long I can't recall if I actually told him that or was misquoted or lied to him or who knows. I guess what it comes down to is, if you want my official sworn testimony on this supposed hospital conversation, all I can say is that right now I can't recall anything about such a conversation or whether it took place or not. Sorry I can't be of more help to you."

There is no possibility the statement above could lead to a perjury conviction. It worked for Ollie North and the rest of the Reagan administration, didn't it?
Wrong. There are close to a dozen people and multiple taped conversations that can show she remembered it fine.....until she went on the stand, then she had selective amnesia.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Polish said:
I vaquely remember a work meeting I was at in 1996, 15years ago. VLSI Technology - custom integrated circuit maker. I seem to recall it was an important meeting. At least at the time it seemed important.

Today, in my minds eye, I can not remember the faces of half the attendees. Cannot remember the names of all of the other half lol. Geez, trying to recall what was said back then is impossible now. C'mon, we are talking about 1996.
If the CEO of the company announced that he had embezzled $10,000,000 at the meeting you would have remembered it.
 
May 23, 2010
526
0
0
compete_clean said:
Has it occurred to people here that the FDA is really targeting the illegal manufacture, and distribution (to only one person)of unapproved pharmaceuticals?

I presume the FDA already has information, and the testimony, from people involved in the procurement of the custom manufactured material.
Have not heard this before. Sounds like Balco all over again? Which US company is assumed to be involved, presumably manufacturing a custom-blood booster for Armstrong? What's the source of this information?
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Tubeless said:
Have not heard this before. Sounds like Balco all over again? Which US company is assumed to be involved, presumably manufacturing a custom-blood booster for Armstrong? What's the source of this information?
Armstrong as told a few teammates this story. I heard it from one of them. As I remember it was an cow based blood product (Not Actovigen) that was produced in the midwest. I kinda doubt much will come of it but it could be an interesting avenue for the Feds to pursue.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
Race Radio said:
If the CEO of the company announced that he had embezzled $10,000,000 at the meeting you would have remembered it.
$10,000,000 big deal.

But I will admit embezzlement is a lot worse than taking EPO.

And what if the conversation was a private one that took place across the meeting table? And I wasn't evesdropping. But I knew the embezzler to be a brash young boaster with a texan tendency to exaggerate. "I had some custom calfskin shoes made for me in Ohio" brag brag lie.

By the way, when I am in face to face converstaions with Lance dislikers, I will trash Lance just to join in the fun. If I am amongst fanboys, I will trash the haters - that is fun too. If it is a mixed crowd, well - that is a whole lot of fun.:) It is human nature to gossip and talk trash.

But if I were testifying under oath the gossip and trash talk would disappear.
The truth would come out, and all the trash talk and gossiping I did with all those people would be meaningless.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Polish said:
$10,000,000 big deal.

But I will admit embezzlement is a lot worse than taking EPO.

And what if the conversation was a private one that took place across the meeting table? And I wasn't evesdropping. But I knew the embezzler to be a brash young boaster with a texan tendency to exaggerate. "I had some custom calfskin shoes made for me in Ohio" brag brag lie.

By the way, when I am in face to face converstaions with Lance dislikers, I will trash Lance just to join in the fun. If I am amongst fanboys, I will trash the haters - that is fun too. If it is a mixed crowd, well - that is a whole lot of fun.:) It is human nature to gossip and talk trash.

But if I were testifying under oath the gossip and trash talk would disappear.
The truth would come out, and all the trash talk and gossiping I did with all those people would be meaningless.
Good point, you are right.

It's why Lance is screwed, people would understand if he just took EPO. It is the fraud that will be uncovered that will kill his legacy
 
Aug 4, 2010
198
0
0
Tubeless said:
It would seem logical that the investigators have already contacted Mr Startt. There are likely many such contacts, part of the official investigation, that don't require grand jury testimony - and we don't know about. Stephanie was subpoenaed only after she refused to speak to the investigators voluntarily.

Since Startt provided a deposition in the SCA case, and has no reason to suddenly lose his memory, he's likely going to repeat his story under oath. The feds can use Startt's testimony and the Lemond tape, plus Betsy & Frankie to build a case against Stephanie for obstruction of justice if they so choose - assuming she said she can't recall a thing about the 1996 hospital room conversation.
I believe she used the word IT so tell me what IT is that he said or did that she heard. 2 letters but a huge word in this context IT could be anything that she was talking about he did.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
uspostal said:
I believe she used the word IT so tell me what IT is that he said or did that she heard. 2 letters but a huge word in this context IT could be anything that she was talking about he did.
IT is the same IT she told a dozen other people.
 
Aug 4, 2010
198
0
0
Race Radio said:
IT is the same IT she told a dozen other people.
Well post the link that shows what IT is then should be easy. Maybe IT was lance picking his nose, as had been reportly to have happened according to this thread.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
compete_clean said:
Who said anything about it coming from foreign shores?
Ask Joe P where his stuff comes from, where he expects much of the Euro peloton gets there supplements from. It's not from the US. Those US agencies are charged with catching lawbreakers but really feel the heat when major pharm companies suspect patent violations and products undermining their market are being distributed on the internet. Cycling is just a small tick on the dog but with Lance's help the greedy tick has provided a very visible example for prosecution. They only went after the Balco violators because Congress was compelled to do so. The compulsion is still in motion and Novitsky will ask questions until they know anything important. What we guess now and what will end up happening with the investigation is interesting but it is just speculation. Roll with it.
 
May 9, 2009
583
0
0
Here's the thing about memory: you remember something...until one day you don't. So the fact that she once may have remembered it and told people something about that conversation is not proof that she is lying now about not remembering it. Seems to me that "That was then, this is now," is the perfect defense.
 
Aug 4, 2010
198
0
0
stephens said:
Here's the thing about memory: you remember something...until one day you don't. So the fact that she once may have remembered it and told people something about that conversation is not proof that she is lying now about not remembering it. Seems to me that "That was then, this is now," is the perfect defense.
If the person believes what they are saying IS true then its not perjury, they have to knowing lie and know that its a lie when testifing
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
stephens said:
Here's the thing about memory: you remember something...until one day you don't. So the fact that she once may have remembered it and told people something about that conversation is not proof that she is lying now about not remembering it. Seems to me that "That was then, this is now," is the perfect defense.
It might be if it the memory was inconsequential. This situation is clearly very important to her life and unlikely to fade with time. She either heard it or not.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
Oldman said:
It might be if it the memory was inconsequential. This situation is clearly very important to her life and unlikely to fade with time. She either heard it or not.
And it appears that the answer she gave, under oath, is "NOT".
Impossible to prove otherwise I would think.

She may have told some haters that she DID hear "it".
But does that really matter? I doubt it.

Has anyone gone to ever gone to jail for hearing something and saying they did not? How was it proven? Trajectory and strength of the soundwaves?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
uspostal said:
I believe she used the word IT so tell me what IT is that he said or did that she heard. 2 letters but a huge word in this context IT could be anything that she was talking about he did.
Obviously you haven't listened to the tape.

It was in direct reply to a question from LeMond asking if she would testify about what she heard in the Hospital room, if requested in the case against Trek.
Stephanie also goes in to more detail and mentions how Chris Carmicheal did a 'sweep' of everyone in the room too make sure they are 'trustworthy'.
 
May 23, 2010
526
0
0
uspostal said:
I believe she used the word IT so tell me what IT is that he said or did that she heard. 2 letters but a huge word in this context IT could be anything that she was talking about he did.
You can use that defense with respect to the taped conversation between Lemond and Stephanie, but James Startt's deposition in the SCA case is not ambigous. Here's what the NPR story says about his testimony:

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

Under oath, Startt said he ran into McIlvain at the 2004 Tour de France, and they had a brief conversation. Startt had heard about Armstrong's alleged admission of performance-enhancing drug use. In his testimony, Startt said "I asked her did it definitely happen. And she said, yes it did."
If the FEDs choose to pursue an obstruction of justice charge against Stephanie, they can use the Lemond tape and call Mr Startt, Frankie & Betsy as witnesses to prove their case. There are others that heard "it" first hand from Stephanie as well.

Her defense? Blame poor memory, old age that caused her to suddenly lose all recollection about the case? Yes "it" happened in 1996, but her taped conversation with Lemond was in 2004, her conversation with Startt also in 2004 and her SCA deposition in 2005. Not that long ago.
 
May 21, 2010
581
0
0
Polish said:
$10,000,000 big deal.

But I will admit embezzlement is a lot worse than taking EPO.

And what if the conversation was a private one that took place across the meeting table? And I wasn't evesdropping. But I knew the embezzler to be a brash young boaster with a texan tendency to exaggerate. "I had some custom calfskin shoes made for me in Ohio" brag brag lie.

By the way, when I am in face to face converstaions with Lance dislikers, I will trash Lance just to join in the fun. If I am amongst fanboys, I will trash the haters - that is fun too. If it is a mixed crowd, well - that is a whole lot of fun.:) It is human nature to gossip and talk trash.

But if I were testifying under oath the gossip and trash talk would disappear.
The truth would come out, and all the trash talk and gossiping I did with all those people would be meaningless.
How about you actually heard the embezzler's conversation and were soooo freaked out about it that you went home and did a bad thing and told all of your girlfriends about what you heard? Oh, and they were subsequently obliged to testify also. Any thoughts?

As for para 3: Great! Nice to know you don't have a spine.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Polish said:
And it appears that the answer she gave, under oath, is "NOT".
Impossible to prove otherwise I would think.

She may have told some haters that she DID hear "it".
But does that really matter? I doubt it.

Has anyone gone to ever gone to jail for hearing something and saying they did not? How was it proven? Trajectory and strength of the soundwaves?
You know the answer is yes; you could go to jail if your sworn testimony contradicts clear evidence of your actual knowledge or actions. You and I don't care and the "haters", or people that claim to have heard it apparently do for whatever reason. Now that we're up to date we both should agree we actually don't know anything.
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Polish said:
And it appears that the answer she gave, under oath, is "NOT".
Impossible to prove otherwise I would think.

She may have told some haters that she DID hear "it".
But does that really matter? I doubt it.

Has anyone gone to ever gone to jail for hearing something and saying they did not? How was it proven? Trajectory and strength of the soundwaves?
It depends on the definition of the word "it."

NOT!
 
Dr. Maserati said:
Obviously you haven't listened to the tape.

It was in direct reply to a question from LeMond asking if she would testify about what she heard in the Hospital room, if requested in the case against Trek.
Stephanie also goes in to more detail and mentions how Chris Carmicheal did a 'sweep' of everyone in the room too make sure they are 'trustworthy'.
What of Lisa Shiels? She was there. Maybe she has a letter in the mail?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY