Armstrong v. Anderson, Part Deux

I think Anderson is full of [censored]. He rode the gravy train and when it ended
he tried to blackmail Armstrong. No jury in the world - especially in
Austin, Texas - would find for Mike Anderson.

I do seem to recall a Road to the Tour show before last season when they
showed that designed-especially-for- Lance Armstrong OCLV TT frame. If I
recall correctly, Mike Anderson was on the show playing with a "top secret"
bike and working for the Elvis of cycling. Pretty coll job. I'd do that
for $45,000 a year. IIRC, Anderson lived in the Girona apartment, so he got
free housing, too.

What a [censored].
"MagillaGorilla" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Philip W. Moore said:

This doesn't look good for Mike Anderson or my colleague Hal.

Cyclingnews

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

actually posted this on its website:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/2005/apr05/PltfsMtnforSanctions-4-1-05.pdf

Quoted message said:

Tex,

Don't you think issues as to whether or not USADA testers came to LA's
Dripping Springs crib in July of 2004 should be decided in a plenary

hearing

Quoted message said:

rather than through a series of refuting affidavits?

I mean, for crying out loud, both of those parties know that USADA is

going

Quoted message said:

to have a record of whether or not this scenario actually went down. And
whatever USADA says is going to cast serious doubt on the credibility of

one

Quoted message said:

of the parties.

If USADA testers were in fact there, then Anderson is telling the truth.

If

Quoted message said:

USADA says they never came, then LA's camp is covering up.

I have a feeling though that LA's people checked with USADA about whether
this incident happened or not...and Hal didn't. And that LA's attorneys

are

Quoted message said:

holding this card as an ace in the hole.

There is also the possibility that neither party thinks USADA keeps

records

Quoted message said:

of these visits and thus never even bothered to ask them to confirm...and
that would be seriously remiss on the part of both attorneys.

But if I, as a fact-finder, wanted to know the truth of this incdient...I
certainly wouldn't care what Anderson, College, or the landscaper dude

said.

Quoted message said:

I would simply ask USADA if it happened and then reverse engineer the
credibility of the story from that starting point.

However, even if this incident happened, I still don't see the merit in
Anderson's countersuit. Although I can't really say I see the merit in

LA's

Quoted message said:

lawsuit either....I still don't undersand what LA is saying Anderson did

to

Quoted message said:

him other than act like a total freakshow and [censored].

Here's some photos of the actual freak himself:

http://it.news.yahoo.com/050331/38/362c1.html
http://it.news.yahoo.com/050331/38/362c2.html

Take care,

Magilla

"Philip W. Moore, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

This doesn't look good for Mike Anderson or my colleague Hal. Cyclingnews
actually posted this on its website:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/2005/apr05/PltfsMtnforSanctions-4-1-05.pdf

I love the irony of the legal meaning of "discovery", the vernacular
meaning, and the team name.

Eerie reading other people's e-mails.

I bet Lance got a new email account! It's on the papers attached to the
pleading.

"Geraard Spergen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:1112893065.dc5ffbff3312b790f47c98ea6a01bd72@teranews...

Quoted message said:

"Philip W. Moore, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

This doesn't look good for Mike Anderson or my colleague Hal.

Cyclingnews

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

actually posted this on its website:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/2005/apr05/PltfsMtnforSanctions-4-1-05.pdf

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I love the irony of the legal meaning of "discovery", the vernacular
meaning, and the team name.

Eerie reading other people's e-mails.

Thanks for responding to my post with a completely irrelevant response. By the
way, your allegation that Mr. Hypoglycemic tried to "blackmail" LA implies the
drug accusations are truthful.

Are you aware of that?

Thanks,

Magilla

Philip W. Moore said:

I think Anderson is full of [censored]. He rode the gravy train and when it ended
he tried to blackmail Armstrong. No jury in the world - especially in
Austin, Texas - would find for Mike Anderson.

I do seem to recall a Road to the Tour show before last season when they
showed that designed-especially-for- Lance Armstrong OCLV TT frame. If I
recall correctly, Mike Anderson was on the show playing with a "top secret"
bike and working for the Elvis of cycling. Pretty coll job. I'd do that
for $45,000 a year. IIRC, Anderson lived in the Girona apartment, so he got
free housing, too.

What a [censored].
"MagillaGorilla" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Philip W. Moore said:

This doesn't look good for Mike Anderson or my colleague Hal.

Cyclingnews

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

actually posted this on its website:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/2005/apr05/PltfsMtnforSanctions-4-1-05.pdf

Quoted message said:

Tex,

Don't you think issues as to whether or not USADA testers came to LA's
Dripping Springs crib in July of 2004 should be decided in a plenary

hearing

Quoted message said:

rather than through a series of refuting affidavits?

I mean, for crying out loud, both of those parties know that USADA is

going

Quoted message said:

to have a record of whether or not this scenario actually went down. And
whatever USADA says is going to cast serious doubt on the credibility of

one

Quoted message said:

of the parties.

If USADA testers were in fact there, then Anderson is telling the truth.

If

Quoted message said:

USADA says they never came, then LA's camp is covering up.

I have a feeling though that LA's people checked with USADA about whether
this incident happened or not...and Hal didn't. And that LA's attorneys

are

Quoted message said:

holding this card as an ace in the hole.

There is also the possibility that neither party thinks USADA keeps

records

Quoted message said:

of these visits and thus never even bothered to ask them to confirm...and
that would be seriously remiss on the part of both attorneys.

But if I, as a fact-finder, wanted to know the truth of this incdient...I
certainly wouldn't care what Anderson, College, or the landscaper dude

said.

Quoted message said:

I would simply ask USADA if it happened and then reverse engineer the
credibility of the story from that starting point.

However, even if this incident happened, I still don't see the merit in
Anderson's countersuit. Although I can't really say I see the merit in

LA's

Quoted message said:

lawsuit either....I still don't undersand what LA is saying Anderson did

to

Quoted message said:

him other than act like a total freakshow and [censored].

Here's some photos of the actual freak himself:

http://it.news.yahoo.com/050331/38/362c1.html
http://it.news.yahoo.com/050331/38/362c2.html

Take care,

Magilla

Blackmail does not necessarily mean what you think. When you are in the
public eye, untruthful allegations can hurt you. So, in this case,
Armstrong can be innocent and blackmailed at the same time, although you are
generally correct.

Regarding your point about doping conrols, yeah, you're right, but a
district court in Travis County, Texas is not the forum for such discussions
to occur. At least implicitly, Anderson knows that or he would have gone to
one or more of the agencies and tried to "expose" Armstrong there.

You are a smart little monkey. It's much more fun to discuss things with
you when you rise to your own level.

"MagillaGorilla" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Thanks for responding to my post with a completely irrelevant response.

By the

Quoted message said:

way, your allegation that Mr. Hypoglycemic tried to "blackmail" LA implies

the

Quoted message said:

drug accusations are truthful.

Are you aware of that?

Thanks,

Magilla

Philip W. Moore said:

I think Anderson is full of [censored]. He rode the gravy train and when it

ended

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

he tried to blackmail Armstrong. No jury in the world - especially in
Austin, Texas - would find for Mike Anderson.

I do seem to recall a Road to the Tour show before last season when they
showed that designed-especially-for- Lance Armstrong OCLV TT frame. If

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

recall correctly, Mike Anderson was on the show playing with a "top

secret"

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

bike and working for the Elvis of cycling. Pretty coll job. I'd do

that

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

for $45,000 a year. IIRC, Anderson lived in the Girona apartment, so he

got

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

free housing, too.

What a [censored].
"MagillaGorilla" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Philip W. Moore, Jr." wrote:

> This doesn't look good for Mike Anderson or my colleague Hal.

Cyclingnews

Quoted message said:

> actually posted this on its website:
>
>

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/2005/apr05/PltfsMtnforSanctions-4-1-05.pdf

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Tex,

Don't you think issues as to whether or not USADA testers came to LA's
Dripping Springs crib in July of 2004 should be decided in a plenary

hearing

Quoted message said:

rather than through a series of refuting affidavits?

I mean, for crying out loud, both of those parties know that USADA is

going

Quoted message said:

to have a record of whether or not this scenario actually went down.

And

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

whatever USADA says is going to cast serious doubt on the credibility

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

one

Quoted message said:

of the parties.

If USADA testers were in fact there, then Anderson is telling the

truth.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If

Quoted message said:

USADA says they never came, then LA's camp is covering up.

I have a feeling though that LA's people checked with USADA about

whether

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

this incident happened or not...and Hal didn't. And that LA's

attorneys

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

are

Quoted message said:

holding this card as an ace in the hole.

There is also the possibility that neither party thinks USADA keeps

records

Quoted message said:

of these visits and thus never even bothered to ask them to

confirm...and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that would be seriously remiss on the part of both attorneys.

But if I, as a fact-finder, wanted to know the truth of this

incdient...I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

certainly wouldn't care what Anderson, College, or the landscaper dude

said.

Quoted message said:

I would simply ask USADA if it happened and then reverse engineer the
credibility of the story from that starting point.

However, even if this incident happened, I still don't see the merit

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Anderson's countersuit. Although I can't really say I see the merit

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

LA's

Quoted message said:

lawsuit either....I still don't undersand what LA is saying Anderson

did

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to

Quoted message said:

him other than act like a total freakshow and [censored].

Here's some photos of the actual freak himself:

http://it.news.yahoo.com/050331/38/362c1.html
http://it.news.yahoo.com/050331/38/362c2.html

Take care,

Magilla

On 04/07/2005 04:29 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Philip W. Moore, Jr."

Quoted message said:

Blackmail does not necessarily mean what you think. When you are in the
public eye, untruthful allegations can hurt you. So, in this case,
Armstrong can be innocent and blackmailed at the same time, although you are
generally correct.

What's the legal difference between blackmail and extortion?

Quoted message said:

Regarding your point about doping conrols, yeah, you're right, but a
district court in Travis County, Texas is not the forum for such discussions
to occur. At least implicitly, Anderson knows that or he would have gone to
one or more of the agencies and tried to "expose" Armstrong there.

You are a smart little monkey. It's much more fun to discuss things with
you when you rise to your own level.

"MagillaGorilla" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Thanks for responding to my post with a completely irrelevant response.

By the

Quoted message said:

way, your allegation that Mr. Hypoglycemic tried to "blackmail" LA implies

the

Quoted message said:

drug accusations are truthful.

Are you aware of that?

Thanks,

Magilla

Philip W. Moore said:

I think Anderson is full of [censored]. He rode the gravy train and when it

ended

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

he tried to blackmail Armstrong. No jury in the world - especially in
Austin, Texas - would find for Mike Anderson.

I do seem to recall a Road to the Tour show before last season when they
showed that designed-especially-for- Lance Armstrong OCLV TT frame. If

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

recall correctly, Mike Anderson was on the show playing with a "top

secret"

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

bike and working for the Elvis of cycling. Pretty coll job. I'd do

that

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

for $45,000 a year. IIRC, Anderson lived in the Girona apartment, so he

got

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

free housing, too.

What a [censored].
"MagillaGorilla" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> "Philip W. Moore, Jr." wrote:
>
>> This doesn't look good for Mike Anderson or my colleague Hal.
Cyclingnews
>> actually posted this on its website:
>>
>>

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/2005/apr05/PltfsMtnforSanctions-4-1-05.pdf

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>
> Tex,
>
> Don't you think issues as to whether or not USADA testers came to LA's
> Dripping Springs crib in July of 2004 should be decided in a plenary
hearing
> rather than through a series of refuting affidavits?
>
> I mean, for crying out loud, both of those parties know that USADA is
going
> to have a record of whether or not this scenario actually went down.

And

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> whatever USADA says is going to cast serious doubt on the credibility

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

one
> of the parties.
>
> If USADA testers were in fact there, then Anderson is telling the

truth.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If
> USADA says they never came, then LA's camp is covering up.
>
> I have a feeling though that LA's people checked with USADA about

whether

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> this incident happened or not...and Hal didn't. And that LA's

attorneys

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

are
> holding this card as an ace in the hole.
>
> There is also the possibility that neither party thinks USADA keeps
records
> of these visits and thus never even bothered to ask them to

confirm...and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> that would be seriously remiss on the part of both attorneys.
>
> But if I, as a fact-finder, wanted to know the truth of this

incdient...I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> certainly wouldn't care what Anderson, College, or the landscaper dude
said.
> I would simply ask USADA if it happened and then reverse engineer the
> credibility of the story from that starting point.
>
> However, even if this incident happened, I still don't see the merit

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Anderson's countersuit. Although I can't really say I see the merit

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

LA's
> lawsuit either....I still don't undersand what LA is saying Anderson

did

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to
> him other than act like a total freakshow and [censored].
>
> Here's some photos of the actual freak himself:
>
> http://it.news.yahoo.com/050331/38/362c1.html
> http://it.news.yahoo.com/050331/38/362c2.html
>
>
> Take care,
>
> Magilla
>

--
Steven L. Sheffield
stevens at veloworks dot com
bellum pax est libertas servitus est ignoratio vis est
ess ay ell tea ell ay kay ee sea eye tee why you ti ay aitch
aitch tee tea pea colon [for word] slash [four ward] slash double-you
double-yew double-ewe dot veloworks dot com [foreword] slash

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 04/07/2005 04:29 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Philip W. Moore, Jr."

Quoted message said:

Blackmail does not necessarily mean what you think. When you are in the
public eye, untruthful allegations can hurt you. So, in this case,
Armstrong can be innocent and blackmailed at the same time, although you

are

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

generally correct.

What's the legal difference between blackmail and extortion?

Steven,

There really isn't a difference between blackmail and extortion as far as I
know, to tell you the truth.

-Philip

Philip W. Moore said:

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 04/07/2005 04:29 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Philip W. Moore, Jr."

Quoted message said:

Blackmail does not necessarily mean what you think. When you are in the
public eye, untruthful allegations can hurt you. So, in this case,
Armstrong can be innocent and blackmailed at the same time, although you

are

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

generally correct.

What's the legal difference between blackmail and extortion?

Steven,

There really isn't a difference between blackmail and extortion as far as I
know, to tell you the truth.

-Philip

You're not allowed to sue for blackmail or extorition as a matter of civil
law. Those are only matters that can be prosecuted in the criminal section.

I completely agree with LA's counsel's argument that testimony or filings in
court are immune as a matter of law. But I've never heard of comments to the
press also being indemnified from defamation claims. If they're not immune
from libel, why would they be immune from defamation? I think Herman got that
one wrong.

As for the alleged USADA skipped test....those affidavits will come back to
bite them if USADA comes out and says they sent testers to Dripping Springs and
LA wasn't there. Although LA wasn't alleged to have even been implicated in
that missed test scenario...so I have no freakin idea what Hal is doing by
asserting it.

If I were the judge I would dismiss both lawsuits....

Thanks,

Magilla

"MagillaGorilla" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Philip W. Moore said:

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 04/07/2005 04:29 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Philip W. Moore, Jr."
<[email hidden]> wrote:

> Blackmail does not necessarily mean what you think. When you are in

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> public eye, untruthful allegations can hurt you. So, in this case,
> Armstrong can be innocent and blackmailed at the same time, although

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

are

Quoted message said:

> generally correct.

What's the legal difference between blackmail and extortion?

Steven,

There really isn't a difference between blackmail and extortion as far

as I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

know, to tell you the truth.

-Philip

You're not allowed to sue for blackmail or extorition as a matter of civil
law. Those are only matters that can be prosecuted in the criminal

section.

Quoted message said:

I completely agree with LA's counsel's argument that testimony or filings

in

Quoted message said:

court are immune as a matter of law. But I've never heard of comments to

the

Quoted message said:

press also being indemnified from defamation claims. If they're not

immune

Quoted message said:

from libel, why would they be immune from defamation? I think Herman got

that

Quoted message said:

one wrong.

As for the alleged USADA skipped test....those affidavits will come back

to

Quoted message said:

bite them if USADA comes out and says they sent testers to Dripping

Springs and

Quoted message said:

LA wasn't there. Although LA wasn't alleged to have even been implicated

in

Quoted message said:

that missed test scenario...so I have no freakin idea what Hal is doing by
asserting it.

If I were the judge I would dismiss both lawsuits....

Thanks,

Magilla

Magilla,

I take it that you don't know Texas common law or that RICO has criminal as
well as civil components. Both allow for extortion claims in the civil
context, and the latter most certainly makes it criminal.

Extortion and blackmail are nothing more than parts of the vernacular.
Their embodiment lies in the substance of their nature, not their labels.

-Philip

"MagillaGorilla" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Philip W. Moore said:

"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 04/07/2005 04:29 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Philip W. Moore, Jr."
<[email hidden]> wrote:

> Blackmail does not necessarily mean what you think. When you are in

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> public eye, untruthful allegations can hurt you. So, in this case,
> Armstrong can be innocent and blackmailed at the same time, although

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

are

Quoted message said:

> generally correct.

What's the legal difference between blackmail and extortion?

Steven,

There really isn't a difference between blackmail and extortion as far

as I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

know, to tell you the truth.

-Philip

You're not allowed to sue for blackmail or extorition as a matter of civil
law. Those are only matters that can be prosecuted in the criminal

section.

Quoted message said:

I completely agree with LA's counsel's argument that testimony or filings

in

Quoted message said:

court are immune as a matter of law. But I've never heard of comments to

the

Quoted message said:

press also being indemnified from defamation claims. If they're not

immune

Quoted message said:

from libel, why would they be immune from defamation? I think Herman got

that

Quoted message said:

one wrong.

As for the alleged USADA skipped test....those affidavits will come back

to

Quoted message said:

bite them if USADA comes out and says they sent testers to Dripping

Springs and

Quoted message said:

LA wasn't there. Although LA wasn't alleged to have even been implicated

in

Quoted message said:

that missed test scenario...so I have no freakin idea what Hal is doing by
asserting it.

If I were the judge I would dismiss both lawsuits....

Thanks,

Magilla

Magilla,

You also missed the boat on defamation vs. libel. Defamation is the
umbrella tort that includes libel (written) and slander (oral).

The immunity the papers talk about concerns testifying in court about
something that somebody wants to sue you for later on. The Courts developed
an absolute testimonial privilege to prevent people from being intimidated
out of testifying for fear of being sued.

-Philip

amen.......(my uncle is a lawyer. Phil Morris is a hack.)

And his two days of RBR acceptance are gone. Thanks for the insight on
the lawsuits. We are done with you now. Seriously.

cp