doddy13 wrote:
On the evidence, I said to isso on MSN earlier today.
If this evidence exists, now is the time to make it public. I want to know it exists.
I believe the claims, but this case is going nowhere without the evidence.
It depends on the significance of the evidence he has. If it is major evidence, which puts it beyond any measurable doubt that Armstrong doped, then yes, but then he would have revealed it at once.
I believe that if he has any evidence at all, it is so small and insignificant that it can only be used to discredit someone by catching them in a lie. But mainly I believe that he has no proper evidence, and only claims from himself, such as the diary he mentioned.
Why wouldn't he have revealed it at once? - The evidence is also proof floyd doped, something he's been contesting.
He also had Armstrong as a friend, Army stood up for him, this was a glimmer of hope Floyd could get a space on the shack.
There's no point slapping a schleck - Sean Kelly on "Who needs a slap"
issoisso wrote:
....and Armstrong just made the very boneheaded move of accusing Landis of extortion. THere's noWWWWWWWW a chance a criminal investigation will actually happen.
Kind of incriminating I think to not have reported the blackmailing given how long it's gone on. Why not report it, given how serious Lance thinks it is?
Edited by Crommy on 21-05-2010 21:16
Sorry, I mean "there's NOW a chance", not "there's NOT a chance"
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
doddy13 wrote:
Why wouldn't he have revealed it at once? - The evidence is also proof floyd doped, something he's been contesting.
He also had Armstrong as a friend, Army stood up for him, this was a glimmer of hope Floyd could get a space on the shack.
I didn't mean at once as in when he obtained the evidence, but at once as in when he made the allegations.
If the evidence was so damning that it would entirely break down any possible defense from Armstrong, he would have given it at once, so that they wouldn't have any extra time to prepare for it. But if it is true that Lance and the rest new about the upcoming allegations before Landis made them, then I highly doubt the existence of any evidence that can be even remotely useful. if he had this, he would not alert them, and let them have time to prepare a defense.
However, seeing as they could not get a proper press statement out until today, it may be that he made no such threats, or at least not any specific ones around this event that seemed credible to Armstrong and his crew.
What I fear is that no proper evidence exists, and everything that anyone can scrape together will purely be based on allegations, and these people will if they step forward be admitting to lying previously, and so ruining their credibility slightly.
Someone mentioned Kristin as a possible witness, now that they are no longer married, but we must also remember that they have 3 children together, and from what I've heard, the breakup wasn't all that ugly. It would take a lot of pressure to get her to talk.
If children have the ability to ignore all odds and percentages, then maybe we can all learn from them. When you think about it, what other choice is there but to hope? We have two options, medically and emotionally: give up, or Fight Like Hell. -Lance Armstrong
In one of the very first emails, Landis invites Armstrong to take them to court, instead of taking him to a doctor, so I guess he was sure enough he could win it, and that Armstrong is of that opinion too.
Rinhoth wrote:
Someone mentioned Kristin as a possible witness, now that they are no longer married, but we must also remember that they have 3 children together, and from what I've heard, the breakup wasn't all that ugly. It would take a lot of pressure to get her to talk.
In a criminal investigation, she has two choices. She eitehr talks and buries them all and stays out here, or she stays silent for the sake of protecting her ex-husband and is done in for obstruction of justice.
You really think she'd leave her kids alone with her in jail just to protect Lance?
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
Rinhoth wrote:
Someone mentioned Kristin as a possible witness, now that they are no longer married, but we must also remember that they have 3 children together, and from what I've heard, the breakup wasn't all that ugly. It would take a lot of pressure to get her to talk.
In a criminal investigation, she has two choices. She eitehr talks and buries them all and stays out here, or she stays silent for the sake of protecting her ex-husband and is done in for obstruction of justice.
You really think she'd leave her kids alone with her in jail just to protect Lance?
Not only would they have to prove that Lance doped for that to be possible, but they would have to prove that she, beyond any doubt, knew about illegal activity, and said nothing. Also, if I am not mistaken, they would have had to subpoena her to appear before a judge, and deny illegal activity there for her to be convicted of obstruction. Seeing as most people that are in on this either loves Lance, or loves themselves too much too say anything, and because no one, except maybe Landis would carry a grudge towards Kristin, this is highly unlikely. I seriously doubt that anyone would want to witness against her, and so find it highly unlikely that se will be convicted.
If children have the ability to ignore all odds and percentages, then maybe we can all learn from them. When you think about it, what other choice is there but to hope? We have two options, medically and emotionally: give up, or Fight Like Hell. -Lance Armstrong
If children have the ability to ignore all odds and percentages, then maybe we can all learn from them. When you think about it, what other choice is there but to hope? We have two options, medically and emotionally: give up, or Fight Like Hell. -Lance Armstrong
issoisso wrote:
[The problem here is this isn't a discussion of philosophy or semantics. Maybe it's because I'm an engineer, but I tend to see things in a very much practical light. And in a practical light, the chances those guys rode clean are about as good as those of me winning the lottery four weeks in a row.
I totally agree with you. I am not a math whiz on the probability comparisons but you are not far off. I just like to point out to all that there is no definitive proof. We need the smoking gun. That's just my Americanism when trying to convict someone. "If the glove does not fit then you must acquit" Everyone knows that O.J. killed his wife but you had to let him off because the jury felt the case was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. (And there was more evidence against O.J. than there is against LA)
The IOC president, Jacques Rogge, called on Landis to provide evidence. "He has to bring proof that this is true," Rogge told Associated Press. "If he has evidence, he should make that evidence available to the USADA or UCI [International Cycling Union]."
Please, dear God, if you have evidence, don't let the UCI anywhere near it
The IOC president, Jacques Rogge, called on Landis to provide evidence. "He has to bring proof that this is true," Rogge told Associated Press. "If he has evidence, he should make that evidence available to the USADA or UCI [International Cycling Union]."
Please, dear God, if you have evidence, don't let the UCI anywhere near it
The IOC are powerless in this. Don't forget that, however they trust all the sport federations. And in the IOC's eyes, the UCI are all honest and not corrupt at all.
There's no point slapping a schleck - Sean Kelly on "Who needs a slap"
Rinhoth wrote:
Someone mentioned Kristin as a possible witness, now that they are no longer married, but we must also remember that they have 3 children together, and from what I've heard, the breakup wasn't all that ugly. It would take a lot of pressure to get her to talk.
In a criminal investigation, she has two choices. She eitehr talks and buries them all and stays out here, or she stays silent for the sake of protecting her ex-husband and is done in for obstruction of justice.
You really think she'd leave her kids alone with her in jail just to protect Lance?
Not only would they have to prove that Lance doped for that to be possible, but they would have to prove that she, beyond any doubt, knew about illegal activity, and said nothing. Also, if I am not mistaken, they would have had to subpoena her to appear before a judge, and deny illegal activity there for her to be convicted of obstruction. Seeing as most people that are in on this either loves Lance, or loves themselves too much too say anything, and because no one, except maybe Landis would carry a grudge towards Kristin, this is highly unlikely. I seriously doubt that anyone would want to witness against her, and so find it highly unlikely that se will be convicted.
You don't understand my point. Convicted for refusing to testify. Obstruction of justice.
I don't know if that's how it goes in the US, but given the similarities in the western world, I would assume so.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
If only it was possible to do all this wit out their involvement whatsoever, but it seems impossible
If children have the ability to ignore all odds and percentages, then maybe we can all learn from them. When you think about it, what other choice is there but to hope? We have two options, medically and emotionally: give up, or Fight Like Hell. -Lance Armstrong
Rinhoth wrote:
Someone mentioned Kristin as a possible witness, now that they are no longer married, but we must also remember that they have 3 children together, and from what I've heard, the breakup wasn't all that ugly. It would take a lot of pressure to get her to talk.
In a criminal investigation, she has two choices. She eitehr talks and buries them all and stays out here, or she stays silent for the sake of protecting her ex-husband and is done in for obstruction of justice.
You really think she'd leave her kids alone with her in jail just to protect Lance?
Not only would they have to prove that Lance doped for that to be possible, but they would have to prove that she, beyond any doubt, knew about illegal activity, and said nothing. Also, if I am not mistaken, they would have had to subpoena her to appear before a judge, and deny illegal activity there for her to be convicted of obstruction. Seeing as most people that are in on this either loves Lance, or loves themselves too much too say anything, and because no one, except maybe Landis would carry a grudge towards Kristin, this is highly unlikely. I seriously doubt that anyone would want to witness against her, and so find it highly unlikely that se will be convicted.
You don't understand my point. Convicted for refusing to testify. Obstruction of justice.
I don't know if that's how it goes in the US, but given the similarities in the western world, I would assume so.
I'm not an American either, but again, if I'm not mistaken, there is something that protects people fro testifying against their husband/wife, and the question is whether or not such a law would keep her protected still, seeing as she was married to him at the time. I'm not saying that it is impossible to crack her, but I believe she would have to be put on the edge of the cliff for that to happen.
If children have the ability to ignore all odds and percentages, then maybe we can all learn from them. When you think about it, what other choice is there but to hope? We have two options, medically and emotionally: give up, or Fight Like Hell. -Lance Armstrong
If Landis had any credible evidence then Lance would have paid him off at this point. If you believe the report that LA failed and drug test and paid off the UCI. What's another check to LA? He has got the money.
We would have never gotten to this point if Landis had real dirt on LA. LA would have paid him off or gotten his team in the TOC and the emails would never seen the light of day.
The UCI also announced on Friday the bans and fines issued to the Szczepaniak brothers by the PZK as sanction for their offences.
The PZK showed little leniency to the brothers, with Kacper banned from competition for four years. Pawel was dealt with even more severity, banned for eight years. They also received respective fines of 1,680 and 750 euros.
It's their first offences - why are they getting such large sentences when Vinodoperov only gets 2 years
The law of evidence includes a privilege extended to a married couple so that neither a husband nor a wife can be compelled to testify against a spouse. This rule was designed to protect intrafamily relations and privacy. In addition, it was meant to promote communication between husbands and wives by making revelations between them strictly confidential
the question is whether this would protect her. if it does, then there is no way she'll crack.
If children have the ability to ignore all odds and percentages, then maybe we can all learn from them. When you think about it, what other choice is there but to hope? We have two options, medically and emotionally: give up, or Fight Like Hell. -Lance Armstrong
The law of evidence includes a privilege extended to a married couple so that neither a husband nor a wife can be compelled to testify against a spouse. This rule was designed to protect intrafamily relations and privacy. In addition, it was meant to promote communication between husbands and wives by making revelations between them strictly confidential
Rinhoth wrote:
I'm not an American either, but again, if I'm not mistaken, there is something that protects people fro testifying against their husband/wife, and the question is whether or not such a law would keep her protected still, seeing as she was married to him at the time.
I looked into that and i can confirm that no, it no longer applies.
Rinhoth wrote:
I'm not saying that it is impossible to crack her, but I believe she would have to be put on the edge of the cliff for that to happen.
I think all that's needed is to put this simple fact to her:
"You have two choices
1. You talk and nothing bad happens to you other than intense media scrutiny
2. You deny everything and your kids are delivered to social services while their mother serves jail time"
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
I just think they'll need quite a bit of proof before targeting her, and they will also need to prove that she knew about it.
Edited by Rinhoth on 21-05-2010 22:11
If children have the ability to ignore all odds and percentages, then maybe we can all learn from them. When you think about it, what other choice is there but to hope? We have two options, medically and emotionally: give up, or Fight Like Hell. -Lance Armstrong
