Much Ado Abouth Nothing

Tom Paterson

>From: "B. Lafferty"

(I noted):

>> Revenge isn't exactly a truth drug.

(B.L. responded):

> It tends to be more believable than money as a motivator, especially if
>there is physical evidence to back up the story. Ask any prosecutor.

Just how much more believeable would you say revenge-motivated testimony is
than that paid for in cash, Mr. Lafferty? Could you express that "tendency" as
a percentage, perhaps?

(I asked):

>> So, what did you think of the stages today, BL? You know, Tour of Georgia,
>the ones Lance won? TT maybe a gimme, but a fast downhill bunch sprint?

(B. L. replied):

>I really don't know what to think.

I'm sure you have some reaction--

< 64 seconds over Bobby J? Is that
>impressive? Do you conclude from today's sprint that Armstrong will be
>contesting field sprints a la Hinault come >July?

Bobby J? Well he did podium at the TdF. Stranger things have happened than a
return to form, esp. with a new DS he seems happier with. Time will tell, and
with Lance's TdF efforts, also. Field sprints a la Hinault a def. long shot.
Maybe today showed a first step... Remember, he used to be a mediocre TT'er,
too. True, some people say one can't learn to TT or sprint, that the abilities
are inborn, there or not there.

(I asked):

< Did you know that part of the new training regime this year includes
>pulling his kids
>> around the Hill Country in a trailer? >>Pretty effective, apparently.

(B.L. replied):

>I didn't but, somehow I don't think that's any more a key part of his
>training to peak in July than humping >Sheryl between now and then.

A key part of life. Showing his compartmentalizing skills again, isn't he
(racing successfully in warm-up races, time with kids, love life)? The
pejorative speaks to jealousy. Denied? --TP

B. Lafferty

"Tom Paterson" <dustoyevsky@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20040422204652.28622.00000225@mb-m29.aol.com...
> Just how much more believeable would you say revenge-motivated testimony
is
> than that paid for in cash, Mr. Lafferty? Could you express that
"tendency" as
> a percentage, perhaps?

Percentage, no. But a revenge motive supported by some real evidence is
generally more understood and accepted by jurors. At least that's the view
I've heard expressed by a several prosecutors I know with extensive
experience in criminal prosecution. That is not to say that convictions
aren't also obtained via paid informants.
>
> (I asked):
>
> >> So, what did you think of the stages today, BL? You know, Tour of
Georgia,
> >the ones Lance won? TT maybe a gimme, but a fast downhill bunch sprint?
>
> (B. L. replied):
>
> >I really don't know what to think.
>
> I'm sure you have some reaction--
>
> < 64 seconds over Bobby J? Is that
> >impressive? Do you conclude from today's sprint that Armstrong will be
> >contesting field sprints a la Hinault come >July?
>
> Bobby J? Well he did podium at the TdF. Stranger things have happened than
a
> return to form, esp. with a new DS he seems happier with. Time will tell,
and
> with Lance's TdF efforts, also.

Time will indeed tell. While Julich is having his rebirth, I don't
think much of his chances in the Tour. Top 25 perhaps with an outside
chance of a stage win.


> Field sprints a la Hinault a def. long shot.
> Maybe today showed a first step... Remember, he used to be a mediocre
TT'er,
> too. True, some people say one can't learn to TT or sprint, that the
abilities
> are inborn, there or not there.

So long a shot as to be more than unlikely, unless it's a sprint from a
small breakaway group. Not only is Armstrong no match for the Tour's top
sprinters in form, he isn't about to risk mashing up his body/face as
Hinault did.

> A key part of life. Showing his compartmentalizing skills again, isn't he
> (racing successfully in warm-up races, time with kids, love life)? The
> pejorative speaks to jealousy. Denied? --TP

ROTFL

Tom Paterson

>From: "B. Lafferty"

>Percentage, no.

So we're saying less than a hundred.
>But a revenge motive supported by some real evidence is
>generally more understood and accepted by jurors. At least that's the view
>I've heard expressed by a several prosecutors I know with extensive
>experience in criminal prosecution. That is not to say that convictions
>aren't also obtained via paid informants.

I'd say we have revenge and money, as there are lost wages and employment
suitability issues here. I have almost no jury experience but jealousy,
revenge, money-- people will do anything. So it's the evidence that must be
decided on. For example, recently in this very newsgroup, someone was calling
S. Crowe a "washed-up pop singer" when in fact both her single and CD were very
high on the US sales charts; moreover the CD was a "retrospective" of her chart
hits spanning the last ten years or more, at least a few of which she shared
writing credits for. Thus, it would appear that a negative emotion (perhaps
some form of hatred) caused someone to present that which was patently and
wholly false as "true". I should do a search and find out who that was...

[Armstrong as field sprinter, a long shot]

> So long a shot as to be more than unlikely, unless it's a sprint from a
>small breakaway group. Not only is Armstrong no match for the Tour's top
>sprinters in form, he isn't about to risk mashing up his body/face as
>Hinault did.

True, true, true. The last, especially when unneccessary. Again, calculating,
compartmentalizing. Winning.

>> The
>> pejorative speaks to jealousy. Denied?

> ROTFL

I think we're exaggerating our response here. "See above". --TP

jim gravity

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote in message:

> Doping is a problem. 30% of the peloton using performance enhancing drugs is
> a serious problem all right. But that means that 70% aren't.

From that recent French report, about 30% of the supposedly squeaky
clean French riders/French teams are showing blood abnormalities that
are consistent with epo abuse...and they aren't "testing positive". I
presume those samples were also tested directly for epo. If those
riders really were clean and those blood abnormalities are a result of
super hard training or altitude or eating too much fiber, the
Australian reticulocyte test will have to be re-examined for eficacy.

I think it's more likely that more and more is being revealed about
what it means to fail a drug test. Remember, those French licensed
riders are supposed to be the most tested, and therefor cleanest
riders in the bunch. In my own opinion, I'm knocking 70% clean down
to about 54.5%.

Tom Kunich

"B. Lafferty" <Magni@Italia.com> wrote in message
news:viYhc.6920$gH6.5292@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:zNXhc.7433$e4.6015@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> Those tests coming up with 30% suspected drug use relate to French based
> cyclists who are tested (health profiled) with greater rigor than
countries
> such as Spain. Recall, if you can, that Willy Voight spoke of Spain as a
> major source for the drugs that he obtained for Festina.

So, Brian, do you suppose that's because in France you can't get these drugs
without a prescription and in Spain you can buy it over-the-counter?

> > Manzano has been telling HIS story. That is HIS version of the truth.
And
> > it's his version that is being compared to reality. As far as his direct
> > evidence is concerned I believe him implicitly. But his indirect ideas
of
> > who is and who isn't doping really are a problem.
>
> His version of the truth, indeed. Replete with written prescriptions
> from the Kelme doctors.

So you are saying that Jesus has written prescriptions for riders other than
himself? Of course you are. But then that's because EVERYONE is doping in
your book. There are no clean riders and you are hoping to the bottom of
your heart that someone proves this for you.

B. Lafferty

"Tom Paterson" <dustoyevsky@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20040423092257.17234.00000269@mb-m11.aol.com...
> >From: "B. Lafferty"
>
> >Percentage, no.
>
> So we're saying less than a hundred.

Less than absolute certainty. Are you by chance an engineer?

> >But a revenge motive supported by some real evidence is
> >generally more understood and accepted by jurors. At least that's the
view
> >I've heard expressed by a several prosecutors I know with extensive
> >experience in criminal prosecution. That is not to say that convictions
> >aren't also obtained via paid informants.
>
> I'd say we have revenge and money, as there are lost wages and employment
> suitability issues here. I have almost no jury experience but jealousy,
> revenge, money-- people will do anything. So it's the evidence that must
be
> decided on.

Absolutly right. A jusry must decide based on all the evidence and how they
view credibility. I think it's an easier sell (revenge) than paying for
testimony. But, it's usually only part of a case. Manzano will be dragged
through the mud by Hein and Kelme management. I think Hein and Kelme will
look like the fools that they are.


For example, recently in this very newsgroup, someone was calling
> S. Crowe a "washed-up pop singer" when in fact both her single and CD were
very
> high on the US sales charts; moreover the CD was a "retrospective" of her
chart
> hits spanning the last ten years or more, at least a few of which she
shared
> writing credits for. Thus, it would appear that a negative emotion
(perhaps
> some form of hatred) caused someone to present that which was patently and
> wholly false as "true". I should do a search and find out who that was...

But you, as a juror, were able to ferret out the "truth."

>
> [Armstrong as field sprinter, a long shot]
>
> > So long a shot as to be more than unlikely, unless it's a sprint from a
> >small breakaway group. Not only is Armstrong no match for the Tour's top
> >sprinters in form, he isn't about to risk mashing up his body/face as
> >Hinault did.
>
> True, true, true. The last, especially when unneccessary. Again,
calculating,
> compartmentalizing. Winning.
>
> >> The
> >> pejorative speaks to jealousy. Denied?
>
> > ROTFL
>
> I think we're exaggerating our response here. "See above". --TP

No. Seriously, I smacked my head on the table leg while on the floor
rolling. ;-)

B. Lafferty

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:V%9ic.6233$eZ5.429@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "B. Lafferty" <Magni@Italia.com> wrote in message
> news:viYhc.6920$gH6.5292@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:zNXhc.7433$e4.6015@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >
> > Those tests coming up with 30% suspected drug use relate to French based
> > cyclists who are tested (health profiled) with greater rigor than
> countries
> > such as Spain. Recall, if you can, that Willy Voight spoke of Spain as
a
> > major source for the drugs that he obtained for Festina.
>
> So, Brian, do you suppose that's because in France you can't get these
drugs
> without a prescription and in Spain you can buy it over-the-counter?
No.

>
> > > Manzano has been telling HIS story. That is HIS version of the truth.
> And
> > > it's his version that is being compared to reality. As far as his
direct
> > > evidence is concerned I believe him implicitly. But his indirect ideas
> of
> > > who is and who isn't doping really are a problem.
> >
> > His version of the truth, indeed. Replete with written
prescriptions
> > from the Kelme doctors.
>
> So you are saying that Jesus has written prescriptions for riders other
than
> himself? Of course you are. But then that's because EVERYONE is doping in
> your book. There are no clean riders and you are hoping to the bottom of
> your heart that someone proves this for you.

No. Manzano has said that he has prescriptions for himself. He has
specifically stated that he has been relating his own experiences with
Kelme. It should be fairly easy for the authorities in Spain to determine
who a specific doctor has be giving prescriptions to.

No to "everyone." I'm fairly certain that Bassons and Armstrong were/are
clean. ;-)

Tom, have you read Willy Voet's book?

Tom Kunich

"Tom Paterson" <dustoyevsky@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20040423092257.17234.00000269@mb-m11.aol.com...
>
> recently in this very newsgroup, someone was calling
> S. Crowe a "washed-up pop singer" when in fact both her single and CD were
very
> high on the US sales charts; moreover the CD was a "retrospective" of her
chart
> hits spanning the last ten years or more, at least a few of which she
shared
> writing credits for.

That sounds like Brian.

> Thus, it would appear that a negative emotion (perhaps
> some form of hatred) caused someone to present that which was patently and
> wholly false as "true". I should do a search and find out who that was...

Manzano is unlikely to lie about his experiences in my opinion. But he is
likely to exaggerate his ideas of what other people were doing as an excuse
for his own behavior. That is certainly human.

He goes to a doctor who sees someone that just ain't good enough but with
whom the team has a contract. The "doctor" (I'm using this term loosely you
understand) prescribes preformance enhancers. Jesus knows that other people
on the team are not getting results and go to this doctor as well and
SUPPOSES that they all are treated in the same manner. That IS his truth. He
even talked to his roommate who went to the doctor and got prescribed
performance enhancing drugs. So to Manzano, Indurain went to the doctor and
hence was using drugs.

As I was saying, the truth to Manzano isn't the real or the whole truth.

Tom Paterson

>From: "B. Lafferty"

>Less than absolute certainty.

Noted.

> Are you by chance an engineer?

Actually, I'm retired.

>I think it's an easier sell (revenge) than paying for
>testimony.

Well, NSS! (speaking of detective work). But negative emotions enhancing
accuracy? See below.

>Manzano will be dragged
>through the mud (snip)

(Compared to):

> For example, recently in this very newsgroup, someone was calling
>> S. Crowe a "washed-up pop singer" when in fact both her single and CD were
>very
>> high on the US sales charts (snip)

Not above a little mud-slinging ourselves, are we? "Washed-up dishrag", wasn't
that the quote?

>But you, as a juror, were able to ferret out >the "truth."

Yes, besides hearing her "Love Again" hit on the radio, I looked at Billboard's
charts. Big sales for single and CD, for weeks and weeks. Doesn't exactly
square with your "washed-up". The "dishrag" deal is your problem. Perhaps a
somewhat callow perspective on maturity?

>No. Seriously, I smacked my head on the table leg while on the floor
>rolling. ;-)

And was this the first time for this occurrence? --TP

jim gravity

"B. Lafferty" <Magni@Italia.com> wrote in message:
>
> Time will indeed tell. While Julich is having his rebirth, I don't
> think much of his chances in the Tour. Top 25 perhaps with an outside
> chance of a stage win.

Tour schmour for Julich. Julich's place on the GC depends on CSC
strategy. Sastre is more likely to the protected rider (if they
protect anyone). Julich is riding well, and so is Voigt. For
Georgia's purposes, extrapolate from the Criterium International time
trial and you'll see Lance is improving.


Saw Sheryl on TV this morning while at the gym. When asked if she had
any interest in a "bike race in France this summer" she went straight
to plugging the LAF.

B. Lafferty

"Tom Paterson" <dustoyevsky@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20040423111818.26940.00000220@mb-m04.aol.com...
> >From: "B. Lafferty"
>
> >Less than absolute certainty.
>
> Noted.
>
> > Are you by chance an engineer?
>
> Actually, I'm retired.

My wife, who is divorced from an engineer, says that I can't post replies to
you after this one.
>
> >I think it's an easier sell (revenge) than paying for
> >testimony.
>
> Well, NSS! (speaking of detective work). But negative emotions enhancing
> accuracy? See below.
>
> >Manzano will be dragged
> >through the mud (snip)

Then again, he has the Pope on his side now. That should help him in
Catholic Spain.

>
> (Compared to):
>
> > For example, recently in this very newsgroup, someone was calling
> >> S. Crowe a "washed-up pop singer" when in fact both her single and CD
were
> >very
> >> high on the US sales charts (snip)


>
> Not above a little mud-slinging ourselves, are we? "Washed-up dishrag",
wasn't
> that the quote?
>
> >But you, as a juror, were able to ferret out >the "truth."
>
> Yes, besides hearing her "Love Again" hit on the radio, I looked at
Billboard's
> charts. Big sales for single and CD, for weeks and weeks. Doesn't exactly
> square with your "washed-up". The "dishrag" deal is your problem. Perhaps
a
> somewhat callow perspective on maturity?

I get the impression that you're ascribing those comments about Sheryl to
me. They aren't my comments. I like her music and have bought her CDs.

>
> >No. Seriously, I smacked my head on the table leg while on the floor
> >rolling. ;-)
>
> And was this the first time for this occurrence? --TP

No, it happens all the time. Rbr is so funny these days that I've got carpet
burns.

B. Lafferty

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:qfaic.6255$eZ5.981@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Tom Paterson" <dustoyevsky@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
> news:20040423092257.17234.00000269@mb-m11.aol.com...
> >
> > recently in this very newsgroup, someone was calling
> > S. Crowe a "washed-up pop singer" when in fact both her single and CD
were
> very
> > high on the US sales charts; moreover the CD was a "retrospective" of
her
> chart
> > hits spanning the last ten years or more, at least a few of which she
> shared
> > writing credits for.
>
> That sounds like Brian.

Wrong again, Tom. This obsession of yours is getting very creepy.

B. Lafferty

"jim gravity" <jim_gravity@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:febcdd69.0404230721.321e5762@posting.google.com...
> "B. Lafferty" <Magni@Italia.com> wrote in message:
> >
> > Time will indeed tell. While Julich is having his rebirth, I don't
> > think much of his chances in the Tour. Top 25 perhaps with an outside
> > chance of a stage win.
>
> Tour schmour for Julich. Julich's place on the GC depends on CSC
> strategy. Sastre is more likely to the protected rider (if they
> protect anyone). Julich is riding well, and so is Voigt. For
> Georgia's purposes, extrapolate from the Criterium International time
> trial and you'll see Lance is improving.
>
>
> Saw Sheryl on TV this morning while at the gym. When asked if she had
> any interest in a "bike race in France this summer" she went straight
> to plugging the LAF.

She's a pro. Promotion is what the music industry is all about and she's
learned the script very well.**

**Note to Tom Kunich--This is a positive for her.

Kyle Legate

Tom Paterson wrote:
>> From: "B. Lafferty"
>
>> Percentage, no.
>
> So we're saying less than a hundred.
>> But a revenge motive supported by some real evidence is
>> generally more understood and accepted by jurors. At least that's
>> the view I've heard expressed by a several prosecutors I know with
>> extensive experience in criminal prosecution. That is not to say
>> that convictions aren't also obtained via paid informants.
>
> I'd say we have revenge and money, as there are lost wages and
> employment suitability issues here. I have almost no jury experience
> but jealousy, revenge, money-- people will do anything. So it's the
> evidence that must be decided on. For example, recently in this very
> newsgroup, someone was calling S. Crowe a "washed-up pop singer" when
> in fact both her single and CD were very high on the US sales charts;
> moreover the CD was a "retrospective" of her chart hits spanning the
> last ten years or more, at least a few of which she shared writing
> credits for. Thus, it would appear that a negative emotion (perhaps
> some form of hatred) caused someone to present that which was
> patently and wholly false as "true". I should do a search and find
> out who that was...
>
I know who it was. I was pulling a Kunich that day. Don't make me pay twice.