This has gone completely bust, thank God. In the past 24 hours, it has only gotten two donations ($100 and $20) for a $11,939 total. I highly doubt it will ever make it to even $12,500 unless someone makes a large donation.
This has gone completely bust, thank God. In the past 24 hours, it has only gotten two donations ($100 and $20) for a $11,939 total. I highly doubt it will ever make it to even $12,500 unless someone makes a large donation.
there are enough people speaking out on how we should not donate to her and pro athletes are not on her side. She never specified how she will use the money. She has a lot more than most. She has fancy cars and a house. She just wants to maintain her previous lifestyle.
I think Shelby cheated and has been cheating. When she tested pos in January she freaked out and may have thought to herself that she should come clean. But then she realized how much she would lose by doing that. Her teammates, her competitors respect, her employment, her credibility, so many friends--and what is more she may have felt it would impact her sister Shayla, who is still in the sport.
So she lied. She lied because it was the safest thing to do to maintain at least some of it and potentially get away with all of it. she'll never come clean
I can at least respect that. If you are going to be a criminal, lie until the bitter end. I couldn't believe when Ben Johnson folded so quickly. Even Armstrong, what did he gain telling the truth?
liar soorer wrote:
kow992928288ii wrote:
Winning a case on a procedural technicality isn't proving your innocence.
Track athletes need to act like LeBron or Tom Brady. They are professional athletes and need to vet any food sources, have their own chefs, and know the entire history of what they eat.
Wada or IOC changed the procedures to ensure that this procedural technicality did not occur again.
ie the procedures gave false positives.
Most on Wada testing are amateurs and earn nothing let alone the multi millions of LeBron et al . Who by the way are not Wada tested.
Do read prior to posting.
There are other testing agencies besides WADA so the ability stands. Spend the dough to make sure you don't 8ngest anything banned by accident.
kow992928288ii wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
Wada or IOC changed the procedures to ensure that this procedural technicality did not occur again.
ie the procedures gave false positives.
Most on Wada testing are amateurs and earn nothing let alone the multi millions of LeBron et al . Who by the way are not Wada tested.
Do read prior to posting.
There are other testing agencies besides WADA so the ability stands. Spend the dough to make sure you don't 8ngest anything banned by accident.
*Analogy and ingest
She would have raised more money with an OnlyFans account.
Lance was making real headway towards 70.3 and Ironman, he didn't want a looming suspension to cause issues. So he fessed up thinking it would be "oh we get it, you go Lance!" and instead it was USADA saying lifetime ban. I'm not saying he was ever going to be WC at either distance, but he could have been top 10, which is pretty impressive in and of itself, let alone from an athlete coming from another sport.
Oh Please wrote:
Lance was making real headway towards 70.3 and Ironman, he didn't want a looming suspension to cause issues. So he fessed up thinking it would be "oh we get it, you go Lance!" and instead it was USADA saying lifetime ban. I'm not saying he was ever going to be WC at either distance, but he could have been top 10, which is pretty impressive in and of itself, let alone from an athlete coming from another sport.
Armstrong was already a world class triathlete as a teenager before he decided to focus on cycling. If he did continue to compete in triathlon he would merely have been returning to his original specialty.
the way letsrun is shilling for this girl reminding us that lawyers are EXPENSIVE, well I'll remember the next time I need a lawyer, to start a gofundme because I am entitled to other people's money to fund my private lawyer.
give me a break. get a job, Shelby.
Boy, you sure like excrement. It turns up yet again. All your posts are full of it.
Boy oh boy!
What intellectual depth from Armstronglivs.
Trashed the last century of Western Philosophy as excrement.
I am not saying that I did a good job of presenting relative morality and social construction theory but it deserved more than the regular excrement response.
liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Boy, you sure like excrement. It turns up yet again. All your posts are full of it.
Boy oh boy!
What intellectual depth from Armstronglivs.
Trashed the last century of Western Philosophy as excrement.
I am not saying that I did a good job of presenting relative morality and social construction theory but it deserved more than the regular excrement response.
Your history of Western Philosophy was excrement. Like all your dumb comments.
ghat man wrote:
Anarcho-Bidenist wrote:
I misspoke. You can't prove innocence; you can only be found guilty or not guilty and she was found not guilty.
Are you implying that Modahl was actually guilty, but somehow immediately knew there was a screw-up in the lab, so she would have a good chance of successfully appealing, despite her guilt?
Her legal fees were approximately £500,000. I find it hard to believe someone would spend so much money protesting their innocence if they were guilty. Do you know of any athletes who made similar legal challenges, at enormous cost, and weren't successful? If there are no examples and only examples of athletes protesting their innocence who are eventually found not guilty, that would lead me to take the claims of those protesting their innocence seriously.
Source for your £500,000 claim? How much did she pay vs Nike/BTC?...
She claimed £480,000
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/athletics/1070234.stmShe didn't run for BTC and I don't know she if she was sponsored by Nike.
Armstronglivs wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
Boy oh boy!
What intellectual depth from Armstronglivs.
Trashed the last century of Western Philosophy as excrement.
I am not saying that I did a good job of presenting relative morality and social construction theory but it deserved more than the regular excrement response.
Your history of Western Philosophy was excrement. Like all your dumb comments.
What!
There has been no debate on relative and absolute morality nor whole university courses based on social construction theory?
Someone said she has nice cars. As a fellow car-owner, I am wondering what does she drive?
landon gallon wrote:
Someone said she has nice cars. As a fellow car-owner, I am wondering what does she drive?
I believe she has a Jeep Wrangler and a VW bus converted to a camper. Without doing much research on year/mileage/when she bought them, hard to say how expensive they were. If she got that wrangler in the past year, brand new, likely a whole lot. If she got it 2nd hand a few years ago, probably an affordable whip.
Just curious, does Shelby realize that the authors of the two poorly written, fundamentally flawed supporting blogs are like ridiculous conspiracy theorists on twitter (@twoggle3 and @moultonk) without any qualifications? Her whole schtick is bad.
Also, I'm not convinced @twoggle3 and @moultonk are seperate people considering their twitter style and the number of identical posts between them.
LOL, yes, see for example here for background:
https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=10829287&page=27#10831318
go away, Shelby wrote:
This has gone completely bust, thank God. In the past 24 hours, it has only gotten two donations ($100 and $20) for a $11,939 total. I highly doubt it will ever make it to even $12,500 unless someone makes a large donation.
Why are you happy that it is failing? If you are so confident she is guilty, then why not let her have a full appeal and still be convicted?
rojo wrote:
go away, Shelby wrote:
This has gone completely bust, thank God. In the past 24 hours, it has only gotten two donations ($100 and $20) for a $11,939 total. I highly doubt it will ever make it to even $12,500 unless someone makes a large donation.
Why are you happy that it is failing? If you are so confident she is guilty, then why not let her have a full appeal and still be convicted?
The only grounds for an appeal are procedural grounds.
There has not been a suggestion from anyone other than me as to what such might be.
My thought was the they allowed Ayotte to be an expert opinion on he own factual statement, and that she is not an independent experts as tied via funding to Wada.