Ferminal said:
Two things - the contempt Lance shows the process and the lawyer. The fact that he is clearly trying to not answer questions with specific answers for fear he will catch himself out with a later answer (shouldn't truth be non-variable?)
Second - the laywer for SCA - I could do better myself if i watched Matlock for a few hours. He seems ill prepared, ill informed and almost aplogetic.
TeamSkyFans said:
You have brought this up before and i dont completely agree with it. Going by personal experience, in the past i have shaken my head when saying something i didnt agree with, ie i didnt mind the other person watching something on tv. However, i have also shaken my head when i actually have agreed with something, because i dont agree with the incident/cant believe it happened, ie in this instance Lance could have been thinking about how he didnt believe that someone would lie about him like that, and so shook his head.
I'm no Lance supporter at all and maybe other body language gives your idea support. This post will probably also get buried. However, i dont agree that one bit of body language can tell you everything. Have you any qualifications at all?
While I have little doubt Lance is lying... I am amazed at how many experts on body language we have here.
And expert lawyers too.
You know what... I watched Alias on TV once... the CIA should hire me!
And expert lawyers too.
You know what... I watched Alias on TV once... the CIA should hire me!
Digger said:
How much experience do you have with police interogation? Or courtroom questioninf?
- Aug 13, 2009
- 12,854
- 1
- 0
flicker said:
Well, there was this time once in Turkey.....but that involved a car battery and some jumper cables.
Digger said:
I watched the last 10 minute section, caffeine pills, peds etc. The comment you made about the SCA lawyer patronizing Lance to me was uninformed.
My comment to you, is that interrogators and attorneys have different styles, which may or may not be effective. Although some might think that putting Lance over a barrel, grilling him what have you, might have the result of catching him in a lie, that is not necessarily the case.
These interrogators are schooled in the art of extracting information and they are very effective at doing so.
I appreciate the videos as now I can make my own conclusions.
The posters in this forum are generally very biased against Armstrong. These videoed depositions give me more information to draw my own conclusion. Kudos to Velocity.
Thank you.
Flicker
- Aug 13, 2009
- 12,854
- 1
- 0
- May 27, 2010
- 6,333
- 3
- 17,485
frenchfry said:
If the lawyer had asked him about whether he trained hard, I am sure that Lance's answer would have been consistent.
Q: If someone had said that you had trained hard, would that be false?
A: Absolutely. Made it up. 100%. Absolutely not true.
Q: If you had done some training, when would that have been?
A: Before today.
Q: Did you ever do any hard training in preparation for the Tour de France?
A: How much clearer could I get? If I said I didn't train, then why would I have trained hard?
Q: Did you ever discuss training with anyone, ever, at any time?
A: Why would I talk to anyone about training if I said I didn't train?
Dave.
- May 27, 2010
- 6,333
- 3
- 17,485
Digger said:
From the transcript (i.e. the words are actually published):
We call this: 'She is a w***e' defense.
Works every time.
Alternately, and this is pure speculation
, along with the clip about 'Frankie's old lady', it could go to establishing the misogynistic nature of the accused. Kind of like Barry Bonds' voice mails to his girlfriend are being used to characterize his roid rage.
In Lance's case, it could help explain why Stephanie might lie under oath and would fundamentally validate any testimony from a female that contrasts with Lance's version of events.
Dave.
- Nov 24, 2010
- 263
- 1
- 0
entertainment plus
First off, a big thank you for person supplying the full tapes.
"My style is different to David Walsh's. My approach has been more of an internal one to support clean racing, to support clean sport. My idea of the best tactic is not to slander and defame everybody and bite the hand that feeds you and p1** in the soup. My fight and commitment has always been there."
http://nyvelocity.com/content/features/2011/bicileaks-full-armstrong-sca-testimony
His style is different to David Walsh. Now that is an understatement.
After the GJ finish with miracleboy, statements like these will come back to bite him.
The word hypocrite springs to mind.
First off, a big thank you for person supplying the full tapes.
"My style is different to David Walsh's. My approach has been more of an internal one to support clean racing, to support clean sport. My idea of the best tactic is not to slander and defame everybody and bite the hand that feeds you and p1** in the soup. My fight and commitment has always been there."
http://nyvelocity.com/content/features/2011/bicileaks-full-armstrong-sca-testimony
His style is different to David Walsh. Now that is an understatement.
After the GJ finish with miracleboy, statements like these will come back to bite him.
The word hypocrite springs to mind.
thehog
BANNED
- Jul 27, 2009
- 31,285
- 2
- 22,485
I saw most of these a few years back but good to see them again in their fullness. From a pure comedy perspective their was some gold in there. Defending Ferrari as “Mr. Anti-Doping” must have bought a smile every insider regardless if you like Lance or not. Pure gold. Not mentioning Ferrari “the close family” friend in his book also I found extremely funny.
Of note when Armstrong began to accuse the SCA lawyer of suggesting he paid off the hospital where he had his treatment may have work here but you’d never pull a stunt like that in a real court of law.
On the whole Armstrong is evasive and lacks respect for the due process. The SCA lawyer does mention that arbitration is a “collaborative” approach but it was obvious Armstrong was being anything but collaborative. Again that won’t wash in a more formalised court of law.
Its an interest insight into Armstrong. He looked very shifty but bounces into life and has prepared speeches when he wants to say “I’ve never took drugs” or “I would never risk hurting the 100s of millions of people who have cancer”. He likes the rhetoric and the big statements but is short on facts and remember a detail which is important.
If anything after watching these videos you feel very sorry for the guy. Its sad to watch.
Of note when Armstrong began to accuse the SCA lawyer of suggesting he paid off the hospital where he had his treatment may have work here but you’d never pull a stunt like that in a real court of law.
On the whole Armstrong is evasive and lacks respect for the due process. The SCA lawyer does mention that arbitration is a “collaborative” approach but it was obvious Armstrong was being anything but collaborative. Again that won’t wash in a more formalised court of law.
Its an interest insight into Armstrong. He looked very shifty but bounces into life and has prepared speeches when he wants to say “I’ve never took drugs” or “I would never risk hurting the 100s of millions of people who have cancer”. He likes the rhetoric and the big statements but is short on facts and remember a detail which is important.
If anything after watching these videos you feel very sorry for the guy. Its sad to watch.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Tour de Suisse 2025 - Men's (June 15- June 22)- Started by Tricycle Rider
- Replies: 1K
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2025 stage 20: Verrès – Sestrière, 205 km- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 1K
-
Giro d'Italia Giro D'italia 2025 Stage 16: Piazzola sul Brenta – San Valentino- Started by YavorD
- Replies: 1K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 31K
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2025 Stage 17: San Michele all’Adige – Bormio, 155 km- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 742
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 32K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram