The official CBS 60 minutes thread

Page 28 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
zigmeister said:
Gee...another BS story about Lance and team. Big surprise. Some lying POS who doped, denied, lied, went broke, was shamed, and now needs money by writing a book throws out the "I saw Lance dope" claim, and anybody will give him airtime.

Oh wait, Hincapie also said the story is BS that he told the FDA anything.

Lastly, grand jury testimony is completely confidential. So either, 1) the US prosecution is violating legal orders, risking their license to practice law, jail time, and reputation by leaking info out to try and build their case in the court of public opinion (wouldn't surprise me, they are wasting millions of my taxes on this ridiculous crap to begin with), 2) a person who testified/lawyer is leaking the info out to a source anonymously....or.....lastly...and likely...POS Hamilton wants to sell books. Big surprise.

People can say what they like, but the facts still remain, Lance never failed a test. Tests don't like. If they did, you shouldn't waste time and money with any blood work that your doctor orders and shouldn't believe those either. Yet, everybody does.
+1
Sounds like a suspicious leak to me.
Maybe even an illegal leak yikes.

I can understand why Lance's lawyers would file a motion to investigate...
 
Polish said:
+1
Sounds like a suspicious leak to me.
Maybe even an illegal leak yikes.

I can understand why Lance's lawyers would file a motion to investigate...
Hey Polish, this thread has been dead for a month and a half.

You resuscitate it for this empty comment?

Dave.
 
Aug 3, 2009
3,217
1
0
D-Queued said:
Hey Polish, this thread has been dead for a month and a half.

You resuscitate it for this empty comment?

Dave.
Don't forget bolding this part of the months-old post:

Lastly, grand jury testimony is completely confidential. So either, 1) the US prosecution is violating legal orders, risking their license to practice law, jail time, and reputation by leaking info out to try and build their case in the court of public opinion (wouldn't surprise me, they are wasting millions of my taxes on this ridiculous crap to begin with), 2) a person who testified/lawyer is leaking the info out to a source anonymously....or.....lastly...and likely...POS Hamilton wants to sell books. Big surprise.
Most of which is blatantly incorrect and ignorant of the rules regarding grand jury testimony. Even though it's been stated, repeatedly, with supporting links, that testimony is NOT confidential, if discussed by the witness (and as a result a "person who testified" can't "leak" anything).
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
MacRoadie said:
Even though it's been stated, repeatedly, with supporting links, that testimony is NOT confidential, if discussed by the witness (and as a result a "person who testified" can't "leak" anything).
Yup. And since we're here...:rolleyes:

I had posted this some months ago in the All Things Legal thread.
Granville57 said:
Not sure if this exact link has been posted.

The Federal Grand Jury: Ten Tips for the Unwary
3. Don't be Bullied or Misled About Grand Jury Secrecy.
Federal grand jurors, grand jury court reporters and the prosecutors running the grand jury are under a strict duty to keep any “matter occurring before the grand jury” a secret. Violations of this rule can result in sanctions or criminal contempt charges against a prosecutor. But the rule of secrecy does not apply to federal grand jury witnesses. If you are a grand jury witness, you have the right to tell the whole world about your grand jury testimony. Of course, it may not be in your interest to do this—you may want to keep your appearance before the grand jury under close wraps. You need to understand, however, that it is your call—not the government’s.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
D-Queued said:
Hey Polish, this thread has been dead for a month and a half.

You resuscitate it for this empty comment?

Dave.
Statute of limitations is longer than a month and a half lol

Anyway, go back to page 4 on this thread to where TeamSkyFans posts an article from Murdoch's Sunday Times.

There is a quote from a "source close to the investigation" that contains intimate details of what transpired behind closed doors during Grand Jury hearing(s):

"What is also clear is that fears about professional cyclists refusing to speak about their doping were misplaced. "The problem" said one source close to the investigation, "was not getting them to talk but to stop them from crying so they could continue talking"
Now if this "source" was Tyler's mom or Tyler's Lawyer - no big deal.
But if it was an illegal leak, then it WOULD be a big deal.

Lance and Company recently filed a motion asking for an investigation into GJ leaks btw....
 
Jul 28, 2009
898
0
0
D-Queued said:
Hey Polish, this thread has been dead for a month and a half.

You resuscitate it for this empty comment?

Dave.
It's all part of the plan.

On second thoughts having read Polish's recent epic failure in the LA thread maybe he/she/it scuttled in here because it was a quiet corner to hide.
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
Polish said:
There is a quote from a "source close to the investigation" that contains intimate details of what transpired behind closed doors during Grand Jury hearing(s):
"What is also clear is that fears about professional cyclists refusing to speak about their doping were misplaced. "The problem" said one source close to the investigation, "was not getting them to talk but to stop them from crying so they could continue talking"
Now if this "source" was Tyler's mom or Tyler's Lawyer - no big deal.
But if it was an illegal leak, then it WOULD be a big deal.
And just how, exactly, would that particular "leak" be damaging...to anybody?

(Oh, jeezus. It's almost 1:30am. What am I doing in this thread?)
 
Mar 18, 2009
1,921
0
0
zigmeister said:
Oh wait, Hincapie also said the story is BS that he told the FDA anything.
By "the FDA", you mean the grand jury it called, right?

I thought what he denied was being the leak, saying he didn't talk to anyone about his testimony to the FDA's grand jury. That's a far cry from saying that the story that he told anything to the FDA is BS.
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
rata de sentina said:
It's all part of the plan.

On second thoughts having read Polish's recent epic failure in the LA thread maybe he/she/it scuttled in here because it was a quiet corner to hide.
Yes, this person of no fixed gender is very error prone in its responses to defend the indefensible. The over adulation may possible have caused an extreme bias disorder. :)
 
Aug 1, 2009
329
0
0
Ninety5rpm said:
By "the FDA", you mean the grand jury it called, right?

I thought what he denied was being the leak, saying he didn't talk to anyone about his testimony to the FDA's grand jury.
Actually, he said he didn't talk to CBS about it. He didn't say he didn't tell -anyone- about it. Maybe he told somebody, and that somebody told CBS.

And there's nothing to legally require him to tell the truth about it either. "Honest Michael, I didn't tell the cops nuthin!". It' might look dubious under cross-examination to have lied to the public, but it could be argued to be for the greater good.

-dB
 
flicker said:
Wow,
...
Where is the Tyler 60 minutes best seller? Oh yeah reinventing the doping angle. Where do I buy the book?
Many months later...indeed where can we buy Tyler's book that the fanboys assured us was the underlying reason behind Tyler's revelations.

Too bad Flicker can't answer, but at least for now there appears to be no book despite the fact that most cycling books are released during the TDF.

It appears that talking points are not always useful indicators.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
Granville57 said:
And just how, exactly, would that particular "leak" be damaging...to anybody?

(Oh, jeezus. It's almost 1:30am. What am I doing in this thread?)
First of all, a Grand Jury leak does not need to be damaging to be contemptable.

To quote your post from a few threads up.....

"Federal grand jurors, grand jury court reporters and the prosecutors running the grand jury are under a strict duty to keep any “matter occurring before the grand jury” a secret. Violations of this rule can result in sanctions or criminal contempt charges against a prosecutor."

Secondly, the public disclosure that riders were spilling the beans and sobbing during their testimonies is damaging to the GJ Process itself.

It is also damaging to Lance.
Maybe the riders were not talking about Lance?
Most assume they were.
Witch Hunt.
Character assassination.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Polish said:
First of all, a Grand Jury leak does not need to be damaging to be contemptable.

To quote your post from a few threads up.....

"Federal grand jurors, grand jury court reporters and the prosecutors running the grand jury are under a strict duty to keep any “matter occurring before the grand jury” a secret. Violations of this rule can result in sanctions or criminal contempt charges against a prosecutor."

Secondly, the public disclosure that riders were spilling the beans and sobbing during their testimonies is damaging to the GJ Process itself.

It is also damaging to Lance.
Maybe the riders were not talking about Lance?
Most assume they were.
Witch Hunt.
Character assassination.
They're all crying because they weren't prepared to face reality. Their tears aren't "leaks" although it sounds similar. Even Lance won't be prosecuted for crying....
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Polish said:
troll babble.
The fact is, that statement isn't damaging in any way to anyone specifically. There are no names mentioned. Just because Tex knows what was said because he committed the crimes doesn't mean the statements reveal anything. You have no legitimate point here, I'd stick to the tax dollars thing if I were you. It's the only thing that has any legs...they're tiny ant legs lol, but you gotta take what you got , right lol?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY