No, Lance, say it isn't so!

[Guacho]

More guilty until proven innocent, and/or guilt by insinuation, or association that "everybody was doping".

Prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Armstrong is guilty. If that had existed, it would have been brought out by now.

Even if he comes out and admits doing it you're still gonna be in denial.. Nothing is gonna change that.

 

[kch50428]

Even if he comes out and admits doing it you're still gonna be in denial.. Nothing is gonna change that.

The thing that's not going to change is you - assuming guilt before Armstrong proves himself innocent.

Again, I don't want to live on your planet.

 

[Guacho]

The thing that's not going to change is you - assuming guilt before Armstrong proves himself innocent.

Again, I don't want to live on your planet.

Again, we both do..
He had the chance to prove himself innocent and gave it up....
He's an inspiration and I understand why some many people believe he did it but dont want to accept it.

 

[kch50428]

I don not accept your contention of "giving up" on this most recent action as an admission of guilt. It's not. I do not live on that planet, nor in your reality.

 

[Guacho]

I don not accept your contention of "giving up" on this most recent action as an admission of guilt. It's not. I do not live on that planet, nor in your reality.

It's not an admission of guilt by itself..but again, How in hell he can prove himself innocent if he gives up the chance to do so...

 

[kch50428]

It's not an admission of guilt by itself..but again, How in hell he can prove himself innocent if he gives up the chance to do so...

It's not about him proving himself innocent. They heve to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That's how the justice system works. Rather, is supposed to. The American Justice System is reduced to an oxymoron if the masses swallow your attitude of "guilty until proven innocent".

 

[Just_Me_D]

Big red flags:
1) He's not gonna fight the charges, he has overcome many things in life before but he's giving up everything now.

Let me start out by saying that, other than the one article I read when I woke up this morning, I have not read any other article nor have I watched any TV or listened to any radio or podcast audio in regard to Lance. Now, back to your replies. How much are you willing to give up to have peace of mind? How much are you willing to give to protect your family from unnecessary scrutiny, embarrassment, stress, harassment and possible bullying? Do you have enough money to endlessly pay attorneys to defend against what appears to be years of witch hunts? The point I'm trying to make is the fact that EVERYONE has a breaking point and Lance *may have* reached his.

2) I saw a couple of testimonies from his American teammates ( a few of them lost olympic medals and wee barred from competing ) and I think 12 people telling the same story is a pretty solid evidence. ( yes, I know 12 people could conspire to screw him up but really? )

They could very well be telling the truth, however, can they provide verifiable proof? In regard to the ones who have already lost their medals, was there verifiable evidence against them that caused them to lose them?

3 ) the USDA did in fact find evidence of doping and steroid, it's been in the news.

I'm assuming you mean USADA. Anyway, if I remember reading correctly, a cycling union (I believe) is requesting the USADA to explain to them why Lance has to forfeit his titles. If there was verifiable proof, I can't see the union asking for such an explanation. Again, I have no idea what evidence the USADA may or may not have. All I want them to do is produce it for all to see.

4) Tests showed he did some blood transfusions to manipulate the results in 2009

Now wait! Although I may be medically ignorant, I'm still an educated man . I will accept that tests can show evidence of a blood transfusion, but I am not willing to accept at the moment that those tests can show that the transfusions were used to manipulate results. That is speculation, in my opinion. Again, I'm medically ignorant so you may be right.

 

[Guacho]

Let me start out by saying that, other than the one article I read when I woke up this morning, I have not read any other article nor have I watched any TV or listened to any radio or podcast audio in regard to Lance. Now, back to your replies. How much are you willing to give up to have peace of mind? How much are you willing to give to protect your family from unnecessary scrutiny, embarrassment, stress, harassment and possible bullying? Do you have enough money to endlessly pay attorneys to defend against what appears to be years of witch hunts? The point I'm trying to make is the fact that EVERYONE has a breaking point and Lance *may have* reached his.
They could very well be telling the truth, however, can they provide verifiable proof? In regard to the ones who have already lost their medals, were there verifiable evidence against them that caused them to lose them?
I'm assuming you mean USADA. Anyway, if I remember reading correctly, a cycling union (I believe) is requesting the USADA to explain to them why Lance has to forfeit his titles. If there was verifiable proof, I can't see the union asking for such an explanation. Again, I have no idea what evidence the USADA may or may not have. All I want them to do is produce it for all to see.
Now wait! Although I may be medically ignorant, I'm still an educated man . I will accept that tests can show evidence of a blood transfusion, but I am not willing to accept at the moment that those tests can show that the transfusions were used to manipulate results. That is speculation, in my opinion. Again, I'm medically ignorant so you may be right.

Yes, I meant USADA, sorry.
That's all I want too about the evidence and according to them there's is plenty but we'll see.
I just fail to see the witch hunt and the " french did it" I mean, if they really wanted to get him out of the picture now it's the worst timing, they could've done it years ago to stop him but they didn't have enough evidence, apparently they do now. I just believe the evidence we know today is very damaging and it is a lot stronger than people's claims of " oh this is a witch hunt" and the " french did it".
There was verifiable evidence against one of his teammates ( dont remember his name ), his 1984 olympic gold meal was just forfeited, the tests showed dope.

 

[Just_Me_D]

Yes, I meant USADA, sorry.
That's all I want too about the evidence and according to them there's is plenty but we'll see.
I just fail to see the witch hunt and the " french did it" I mean, if they really wanted to get him out of the picture now it's the worst timing, they could've done it years ago to stop him but they didn't have enough evidence, apparently they do now.

Your statement can be an argument for calling the USADA's pursuit of Armstrong a witch hunt.

I just believe the evidence we know today is very damaging and it is a lot stronger than people's claims of " oh this is a witch hunt" and the " french did it".

What evidence?

There was verifiable evidence against one of his teammates ( dont remember his name ), his 1984 olympic gold meal was just forfeited, the tests showed dope.

1984? That was 28 years ago. A statue of limitations is in order, in my opinion. Anyway, thank you for the comments, my friend. I appreciate it.

 

[Guacho]

Your statement can be an argument for calling the USADA's pursuit of Armstrong a witch hunt. What evidence?
1984? That was 28 years ago. A statue of limitations is in order, in my opinion. Anyway, thank you for the comments, my friend. I appreciate it.

What evidence? If you dont consider the testimony of 12 people damaging... again, this are former teammates and " friends".. But hey, they all "MAY" be lying..
The cyclist's name is Tyler Hamilton, he tested positive for dope in 1984 but was allowed to keep the medal because the lab destroyed a sample and they couldn't perform a second test, a fee weeks ago he finally admitted taking drugs, statute of limitations I believe dont apply in this case, he was one of the guys who incriminated Armstrong..

No, thank you for bringing up your points..

 

[Just_Me_D]

What evidence? If you dont consider the testimony of 12 people damaging... again, this are former teammates and " friends".. But hey, they all "MAY" be lying..damaging...

Yes sir, I think the similar testimony of 12 people is damaging, but testimony, in regard to this, is not proof enough to warrant him being stripped of his titles or warrant an immediate conviction. Show me a video of him using, sales receipts, a ledger of some sort displaying specifics, corroborating testimony of the supplier(s) via a polygraph or even Lance's own admission.

The cyclist's name is Tyler Hamilton, he tested positive for dope in 1984 but was allowed to keep the medal because the lab destroyed a sample and they couldn't perform a second test, a fee weeks ago he finally admitted taking drugs, statute of limitations I believe dont apply in this case, he was one of the guys who incriminated Armstrong..

Had he not admitted to taking drugs, how much evidence did authorities have against him? I'm asking not to prove a point but because I want to know.

No, thank you for bringing up your points..

You're very welcome. I enjoy conversations like this and I love playing devil's advocate.

 

[Guacho]

Yes sir, I think the similar testimony of 12 people is damaging, but testimony, in regard to this, is not proof enough to warrant him being stripped of his titles or warrant an immediate conviction. Show me a video of him using, sales receipts, a ledger of some sort displaying specifics, corroborating testimony of the supplier(s) via a polygraph or even Lance's own admission.
Had he not admitted to taking drugs, how much evidence did authorities have against him? I'm asking not to prove a point but because I want to know.

You're very welcome. I enjoy conversations like this and I love playing devil's advocate.

Correction: Tyler Hamilton's medal is from 2004, he also tested positive in " vuelta a Espa?a".

 

[anon(4698833)]

By some of the logic in here, i could go to court and say that all of the rest of you murdered at least one person, and in that, if you don't represent yourself 110% for the next 10 years straight against said accusation, you're going to be charged with murder.

This little gem here is where the GALACTIC size problem with this case is...

Reasonable doubt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[kch50428]

Lance Armstrong vs. USADA: What are we to believe? - The Washington Post

 

[Just_Me_D]

Lance Armstrong vs. USADA: What are we to believe? - The Washington Post

'nuf said........Allegations, an arguable witch hunt, guilty for quitting and no proof. Did I not mentions these things in my replies?

 

[iPhoneTHS]

They, naysayers and jealous hearts, weren't going to quit until his name was mud.

 

[Just_Me_D]

They, naysayers and jealous hearts, weren't going to quit until his name was mud.

It sure appears that way, doesn't it?

 

[anon(4698833)]

You know where else this kind of "justice" is popular?

 

[Guacho]

Lance

'nuf said........Allegations, an arguable witch hunt, guilty for quitting and no proof. Did I not mentions these things in my replies?

some points from the article :

"There has been no trial, no due process" - he's right, not all these years, but now he refused to go to arbitration which will give Armstrong the chance to face the accusations and clear his name, three arbitration panels reviewed Armstrong's case before they reached a decision, this wasn't just Travis Tygart's witch hunt like the article suggests.

"People lie. Blood and urine usually don?t" - This is a pretty bold statement, the article is based 100% on the tests when it's been proven these can be manipulated .EPO, the substance Armstrong is accused of using has a fairly easy way to cheat the tests, using blood transfusion system to cheat the urine and blood tests.

" Let?s assume these people really are witnesses, let?s assume they?re telling the truth, and then let?s assume that their testimony is the new standard, outweighing all drug test results.
Then what in the world is the point of drug testing? "

Really?? so if we assumed the testimony of all this people is true and they saw him cheating, we should still stand by the test results and honor them...really!!!

"I don?t know if Armstrong did the things he?s accused of doing, and neither do you. I don?t know if these witnesses are telling the truth, and neither do you. I do know two things: First, he passed all his tests."


Again, he's all for the tests....the witnesses and the tests are evidence, all these 12 people could be lying ?? of course, but he never raises questions about the tests and to the fact positive dope tests can be avoided, it has happened many times before.

 

[Guacho]

By some of the logic in here, i could go to court and say that all of the rest of you murdered at least one person, and in that, if you don't represent yourself 110% for the next 10 years straight against said accusation, you're going to be charged with murder.

This little gem here is where the GALACTIC size problem with this case is...

Reasonable doubt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not sure if your example applies.
ok, so if I killed someone 10 years ago and let's say I didn't represent 110% all this time, am I gonna be charged of murder?....there's no body, no weapon but if 2 people saw me buying a gun, another 5 being at the crime scene and another 3 pulling the trigger and getting rid of the body??..what do you think?
Another GALACTIC size gem here is circumstantial evidence, which in many cases has proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt.