Old Runner Guy wrote:
Most likely it [Geoghegen's call] was not criminal. Most of the lawyers watching the case (not onvolved with USADA or Landis) say the CA law says to be a felony the threat has to be specific. This was not specific. Georgian will claim it was a sick sick joke or prank and that will probably hold up legally.
A joke? A prank? Are you serious? Who pulls a "joke" on an opposition witness the night before he's supposed to testify in court?
Corrupt Amish Boy wrote:
ATTORNEYS for Will Geoghegan provide a carefully worded "press release" that says that his phone call wasn't an attempt to intimidate a witness in a legal proceeding. Exactly what was the purpose of the call then?
Exactly. I agree with you CAB. Geoghegen's press release is just a lawyer's attempt to prevent him from being prosecuted for a felony.
Landis's team firing Geoghegen immediately doesn't indicate anything either. Whether Landis knew or wanted Geoghegen to make that call will never be known. Landis had no choice but to salvage this PR disaster by firing Geoghegen immediately.
Geoghegen had no choice but to provide an attorney-generated press release immediately.
malice aforethought wrote:
Avocados Number wrote:I think he has a pretty good idea, especially if he had conversations with them about their doping.
No he actually has NONE. Having "a conversation" with them does not give him any insight into their pysche. And did you think that even if they WERE guilty they would actually say that to Greg Lemond? Please.
Whether Landis or Armstrong are dirty or clean as the driven snow, Greg Lemond does not have a clue. He is there out of bitterness. If they are clean, he is there out envy, as well
I agree 100% with "malice afterthought." Avocado, you built your whole "case" on believing Lemond over Landis and Lance. That's it. You trust Lemond, and don't trust Lance and Landis, and therefore build this whole "logical" case that makes so much sense to you on why Lemond is doing what he is doing. You are being pretty biased in my viewpoint.
I also agree with the other poster who talked about how if cycling is as dirty as they say, and the drug users in that sport have been around for ever (as it is and as they have been), then there is no good reason to believe that Lemond was clean. He says he won "without drugs". Hmmmm....but did he win "without cheating" ??? There's a difference. Blood doping and transfusions are not drug use, and they have been around forever. Why should we trust Lemond?? And if he wants to rat people out so bad, why only the Americans? Why not others he probably knows more about, such as Indurain, or other teammates? I'm absolutely sure he has some 100% evidence of cheating by some cyclists he rode with in the past, but he is mum about that, and has no interest in spilling the beans on them. Instead, he goes on the attack against Landis and Lance based on vague, supposed implied admissions of drug use on their part.
Even if Lemond was clean(which I doubt), and even if he really believes Lance and Landis are guilty, at the VERY least, Lemond has an major ulterior motive: he is NOT doing this for some noble goal of "cleaning up the sport." NO, he is doing it to raise his own profile, as best US cyclist ever.
wrote wrote wrote:
Exactly. I agree with you CAB. Geoghegen's press release is just a lawyer's attempt to prevent him from being prosecuted for a felony.
Landis's team firing Geoghegen immediately doesn't indicate anything either. Whether Landis knew or wanted Geoghegen to make that call will never be known. Landis had no choice but to salvage this PR disaster by firing Geoghegen immediately.
Geoghegen had no choice but to provide an attorney-generated press release immediately.
This is arbritration, not a court. Therefore, it is not an official proceeding. It is an agreed to procedure by the parties involved.
Therefore, it is not clear that felony witness tampering laws apply in this instance.
Geoghegen's attroney's are not going to assume this when tehy wrote his release.
Exactly what I was going to say. In fact, I thought Lemond STILL had a record for MPH in one of the time trials? How would that be possible if equipment had improved AND drugs were so rampant now, but Lemond was clean? If we are going to play the circumstantial evidence game, then there is only one conclusion: Landis doped.
T. Rex wrote:
An interesting accusation, since, if I remember correctly, LeMond held the speed record for a time trial in the TdF from 1989 until it was beat a year or two ago. With the improvements in equipment and aerodynamics over those years you would think that someone could have ridden a time trial faster than LeMond did (to beat Fignon on the Champ Elysees) if the power capabilities of the riders had jumped 20 to 25%.
Just curious, but where do the hGH estimates come from?
The time trial was only 27k downhill with a tailwind, when Lemond set the record
because wrote:
The time trial was only 27k downhill with a tailwind, when Lemond set the record
it was not downhill. dont know about the tailwind but it was not downhill
because wrote:
The time trial was only 27k downhill with a tailwind, when Lemond set the record
True, but it wasn't broken until Zabriskie rode a 19k time trial. Remember, Leemond was talking about a 60 watt jump in power output over what he could accomplish, which makes for a pretty good tailwind in itself. If Armstrong could push 100 watts more than LeMond, you'd think he could have ridden a time trial faster even over a more difficult route.
Old Runner Guy wrote:
This is arbritration, not a court. Therefore, it is not an official proceeding. It is an agreed to procedure by the parties involved.
Therefore, it is not clear that felony witness tampering laws apply in this instance.
Geoghegen's attroney's are not going to assume this when tehy wrote his release.
Wrong. Think again. Velonews mentioned this just today:
We've had many, many questions about the story from Malibu yesterday. One topic in particular has gnerated a lot of mail. We reported yesterday that Floyd Landis's former business manager could be facing felony witness tampering charges after making what could be seen as a threatening phone call to Greg LeMond. Several of you have written to ask if that charge could apply to an arbitration case. According to our consulting attorney Antonio Gallegos, there could be charges:
"I did some quick research. The California Penal Code says that it is illegal to attempt to prevent or dissuade a witness from testifying at any trial, proceeding or inquiry authorized by law. The California Civil Procedure Code recognizes the right of parties to submit their disputes to binding arbitration and California courts will enforce judgments and rulings from arbitration proceedings. I have not researched any judicial decisions on this issue, but it seems clear that an arbitration like the Landis hearing, being conducted under the jurisdiction of the American Arbitration Association, is "authorized by law." So the witness-tampering statute likely applies.
Old Runner Guy wrote:
This is arbritration, not a court. Therefore, it is not an official proceeding. It is an agreed to procedure by the parties involved.
Therefore, it is not clear that felony witness tampering laws apply in this instance.
Geoghegen's attroney's are not going to assume this when tehy wrote his release.
Whether witness tampering or obstruction of justice statutes apply in this context is not entirely clear, but any lawyer worth his salt is of course "going to assume" the worst-case scenario for his client when writing a press release. If they don't assume that he could face criminal liability for his conduct and act accordingly, they are idiots.
The delusion of the Landis-backers here is startling.
So do you also insist that Saddam really did have WMD?
Is the Earth really flat? Is California really an island?
Dear God, snap out of it. You're looking like morons.
wrote wrote wrote:
Old Runner Guy wrote:This is arbritration, not a court. Therefore, it is not an official proceeding. It is an agreed to procedure by the parties involved.
Therefore, it is not clear that felony witness tampering laws apply in this instance.
Geoghegen's attroney's are not going to assume this when tehy wrote his release.
Wrong. Think again. Velonews mentioned this just today:
We've had many, many questions about the story from Malibu yesterday. One topic in particular has gnerated a lot of mail. We reported yesterday that Floyd Landis's former business manager could be facing felony witness tampering charges after making what could be seen as a threatening phone call to Greg LeMond. Several of you have written to ask if that charge could apply to an arbitration case. According to our consulting attorney Antonio Gallegos, there could be charges:
"I did some quick research. The California Penal Code says that it is illegal to attempt to prevent or dissuade a witness from testifying at any trial, proceeding or inquiry authorized by law. The California Civil Procedure Code recognizes the right of parties to submit their disputes to binding arbitration and California courts will enforce judgments and rulings from arbitration proceedings. I have not researched any judicial decisions on this issue, but it seems clear that an arbitration like the Landis hearing, being conducted under the jurisdiction of the American Arbitration Association, is "authorized by law." So the witness-tampering statute likely applies.
Except this is being coducted under WADA (read international rules). The controlling legal rules are, I believe, Swiss. Velo is correct for American proceedings. This is a CAS (swiss based court of arbritration of sports) proceeding.
I'm not saying he is not subject to felony charges, I'm saying this is a very fuzzy area and everyone is assuming it is a cut and dry case of witness tampering. It is not.
...in the presumption of innocence. Whether or not that has any standing in an arbitration hearing with USADA which seems to adhere to the principal pf pressumptive guilt, I just don't know...
not this again wrote:
The delusion of the Landis-backers here is startling.
So do you also insist that Saddam really did have WMD?
Is the Earth really flat? Is California really an island?
Dear God, snap out of it. You're looking like morons.
We have 100% factual evidence that the world isn't flat and california isn't an island. There is no real good evidence against landis.
Perhaps you need a confession? What other potential evidence could exist? A jailhouse snitch?
Reliable testing would be a good start
i believe... wrote:
...in the presumption of innocence.
In the courtroom, that's a good rule.
In the chatroom, it's just a lame excuse and you know it.
There are those of us who are really in-the-know. Your assumption is likely that none of us are lurking and paying attention to how far off base all theories really are. Landis is akin to Armstrong,and the opposite of HA is the connection here. Be smart,use your deductive reasoning skills,and make the fit. HA got his pills from his native country and passed them through an undisclosed channel to the beneficiaries both named,suspected and not yet revealed. Justice will be served and Landis will vow to bring down his dealer in an agreement.
Richard wrote:
We have 100% factual evidence that the world isn't flat and california isn't an island. There is no real good evidence against landis.
Head, meet large intestine.
L'Equipe sent an informant to infiltrate an alleged and highly-regarded sports camp. The informant was outed,but snitched on his mission and risked death due to his attempts to connect to the underworld. I can not - and will not - tell you more at this time due to processes currently in place which prohibit a named person from testifying before grand jury testimony is complete.
Whatever you all do,don't disregard L'Equipe reports. LA and FL are connected through the opposite of HA. Wait,watch,listen,learn and savor the inside information.