Hey yo Leroy, we got some us some fresh meat!



Yojimbo_ said:
Gents.

Perhaps you should re-read the article that was included in the first post in this thread and explain to me how that does not qualify as hearsay. Other than Landis, there are no names attached to any of the comments being made - all there is are references to remarks by unidentified riders who wish to remain anonymous. If that isn't hearsay I don't know what is.

Show me some first person evidence, and tell me who the first persons are who are giving that evidence. Other than Landis and what he's said, I still haven't heard anything concrete and I don't think you have either. And until there is something like that, it's still all hearsay whether you like it or not.

...who the hell cares about you? this is 1st person "evidence" in a federal grand jury... and not hersay.. that's what we were all talking about here.. i like how these idiots on internet forums, when shown to be complete morons and totally wrong try to twist and turn the conversation to try to not look so stupid..

perhaps you should re-read YOUR post? look at what YOU say in YOUR post.. "uncorroborated hearsay testimony".. so what.. the rider is somehow giving "testimony" (your words) to YOU? to us, on Cycling Forums? ..you convened your own federal grand jury? you are obviously talking about it being hearsay in the federal grand jury.. who do you think you're kidding??

look man, you were shown to not have the foggiest idea what the hell the word hearsay meant.. deal with it! please keep on posting and we'll see just how far you can shove your foot down your throat.. what a dumb ass!
 
Cyclists Questioned in Doping Probe - WSJ.com



In the wake of Mr. Landis's disclosures, some riders and team officials are stepping forward with similar stories. In an interview in Vienna this week with Dow Jones Newswires, former pro cyclist Bernhard Kohl, who quit professional cycling after a positive drug test in 2008, said Mr. Landis's descriptions of doping rang true.



"That was exactly the way I also did it," said Mr. Kohl, referring to Mr. Landis's allegation that he and other U.S. Postal riders received blood transfusions during the tour in a hotel room. "The details of the blood bags and the checking for cameras and microphones, the cutting up of the bags and flushing them in the toilet, it all took place in exactly that way," he added.


a bit more here..


Pappillon: Courageous Kohl Confirms Details of Transfusions While Armstrong Denies
 
doctorSpoc said:
...who the hell cares about you? this is 1st person "evidence" in a federal grand jury... and not hersay.. that's what we were all talking about here.. i like how these idiots on internet forums, when shown to be complete morons and totally wrong try to twist and turn the conversation to try to not look so stupid..

perhaps you should re-read YOUR post? look at what YOU say in YOUR post.. "uncorroborated hearsay testimony".. so what.. the rider is somehow giving "testimony" (your words) to YOU? to us, on Cycling Forums? ..you convened your own federal grand jury? you are obviously talking about it being hearsay in the federal grand jury.. who do you think you're kidding??

look man, you were shown to not have the foggiest idea what the hell the word hearsay meant.. deal with it! please keep on posting and we'll see just how far you can shove your foot down your throat.. what a dumb ass!

Looks like I hit a Bro Deal nerve.

Let's face it, you and your new boyfriend Roadhouse just can't stand the idea that there are some people out here who want to see / hear real evidence before making a judgement on what did or did not happen.

And what "grand jury" would that be? I haven't heard of one being convened.
 
Yojimbo_ said:
Looks like I hit a Bro Deal nerve.

Let's face it, you and your new boyfriend Roadhouse just can't stand the idea that there are some people out here who want to see / hear real evidence before making a judgement on what did or did not happen.

And what "grand jury" would that be? I haven't heard of one being convened.

me, i was just making the point that you had no idea what the word hearsay meant.. and then instead of just admitting your error.. you tried to cover it up.. then i exposed you as a liar..

and OMFG!! the investigaton.. you know the one we're all talking about here.. it's a Federal Grand Jury Investigation.. are you a complete and utter mental defective?? please tell me i'm not having a conversation with a 10 year old or something?? if you are sorry for the swearing.. lol..

like i said.. keep posting, we'll see just how far and how many times you can stick that foot in your mouth..
 
Yojimbo_ said:
And what "grand jury" would that be? I haven't heard of one being convened.

If you would occasionally pull your head out of Armstrong's ass then you might be aware of what is going on in the real world.

His ex-teammates are talking. It looks like Armstrong is going to get what he has coming for defrauding people with cancer. Next stop, federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison.
 
doctorSpoc said:
me, i was just making the point that you had no idea what the word hearsay meant.. and then instead of just admitting your error.. you tried to cover it up.. then i exposed you as a liar..

and OMFG!! the investigaton.. you know the one we're all talking about here.. it's a Federal Grand Jury Investigation.. are you a complete and utter mental defective?? please tell me i'm not having a conversation with a 10 year old or something?? if you are sorry for the swearing.. lol..

like i said.. keep posting, we'll see just how far and how many times you can stick that foot in your mouth..

I know exactly what hearsay is, and aside from Landis' comments I haven't heard anything that qualifies otherwise. Just a bunch of third party reports about anonymous riders reputedly saying things. If you have more than that let's hear it.

I also know there are reports of various riders being asked to meet with federal investigators to discuss what they may or may not know about the misuse of federal funds. I don't fully understand the American legal system, but I'm pretty sure meeting with an investigator is not the same thing as being supoenaed to appear at a Grand Jury. I don't think a Grand Jury is convened until the investigation is complete and charges are to be laid, and this investigation is nowhere near that point.

I'm pretty sure you will be only too happy to correct me about your legal system if I've got it wrong. If you understand it yourself that is.
 
roadhouse said:
just some insight. a grand jury is the party issuing subpoenas so it is already convened.

Grand Jury Subpoena - Criminal Law Lawyer Source

Federal Grand Juries

"Grand juries use subpoenas to gather the evidence they need to use in deciding whether crimes have been committed."

http://campus.udayton.edu/~grandjur/fedj/fedj.htm#Gathering%20evidence

exactly there are not "interviews" these are depositions and depositions are taken under oath.. therefore like Martha Stewart and Marion Jones found out.. you get caught lying to a federal grand jury and you WILL do jail time.. so why would these guys be lying like lance's lawyer say they are.. if you're going to lie, why not just lie and say you didn't do anything, the team didn't dope either and be done with it.. why would they lie and say yes, i doped and lance and the whole team did too.. it makes no for them to do that..

and for the record Yojimbo.. i'm not american... it's not MY legal system... but i know how to read.. i also don't go blowing off at the mouth about thing i don't know about either like you seem to like to do.. if you don't know what the hell you're talking about.. why not just keep quite or ask instead of speaking as matter of factly about thing you have no idea about..
 
doctorSpoc said:
exactly there are not "interviews" these are depositions and depositions are taken under oath.. therefore like Martha Stewart and Marion Jones found out.. you get caught lying to a federal grand jury and you WILL do jail time.. so why would these guys be lying like lance's lawyer say they are.. if you're going to lie, why not just lie and say you didn't do anything, the team didn't dope either and be done with it.. why would they lie and say yes, i doped and lance and the whole team did too.. it makes no for them to do that..

and for the record Yojimbo.. i'm not american... it's not MY legal system... but i know how to read.. i also don't go blowing off at the mouth about thing i don't know about either like you seem to like to do.. if you don't know what the hell you're talking about.. why not just keep quite or ask instead of speaking as matter of factly about thing you have no idea about..

I don't think YOU know what you are talking about but you are wearing me down because this thread has gone way off topic.

You have a hard on for Lance and I don't. You don't like it when someone speaks up and questions the anonymous BS that's published these days because that conflicts with your world view.

By the way, Martha Stewart was convicted of obstruction of justice because of false statements she gave to investigators - not because she lied to a grand jury. And you said you could read.......
 
doctorSpoc said:
exactly there are not "interviews" these are depositions and depositions are taken under oath.. therefore like Martha Stewart and Marion Jones found out.. you get caught lying to a federal grand jury and you WILL do jail time.. so why would these guys be lying like lance's lawyer say they are.. if you're going to lie, why not just lie and say you didn't do anything, the team didn't dope either and be done with it.. why would they lie and say yes, i doped and lance and the whole team did too.. it makes no for them to do that..

Wasn't the majority of the jail time that Marion Jones got for her involvement in the check fraud scheme she was involved in with a bit of time tacked on for lying under oath?
 
Yojimbo_ said:
Looks like I hit a Bro Deal nerve.

Let's face it, you and your new boyfriend Roadhouse just can't stand the idea that there are some people out here who want to see / hear real evidence before making a judgement on what did or did not happen.

And what "grand jury" would that be? I haven't heard of one being convened.

Everybody hits a "BroDeal nerve." The dude's a complete tard. He gets upset with anyone who defends Lance, or doesn't think he's doping. The idiot called me an "asshole" in a different thread because I said the same thing, there's no evidence. Then, all of a sudden, I was a "Lance supporter." :rolleyes:

First off, I don't give a damn about Lance Armstrong. I've never met the man, I don't follow his career, and I don't care what he's done or hasn't done. Right down the middle, THERE IS NO PROOF.
 
Yojimbo_ said:
I don't think YOU know what you are talking about but you are wearing me down because this thread has gone way off topic.

You have a hard on for Lance and I don't. You don't like it when someone speaks up and questions the anonymous BS that's published these days because that conflicts with your world view.

By the way, Martha Stewart was convicted of obstruction of justice because of false statements she gave to investigators - not because she lied to a grand jury. And you said you could read.......

i don't particularly like lance armstrong, but what i REALLY, REALLY HATE is people stating STUPID, INCORRECT THINGS as if it's fact... you know like you do every time you put finger to keyboard?

but,, frig man.. YOU ARE INCREDIBLY STUPID.. you still haven't got it... a federal grand jury IS THE FRICK'N INVESTIGATION... federal grand jury do the investigation to see if charges can/should be laid... martha stewart and marion jones both lied to the investigators of A FEDERAL GRAND JURY.. for that they can charge you with a) obstruction of justice (for lying) or b) simply lying to a federal official is also a punishable offence as well.. i would imagine (see i distinguish the reach of my knowledge) that obstruction of justice carries a heavier penalty..

how can you read (i guess you haven't or simply have no reading comprehension to speak of) all these responses and not absorb ANY of it?? roadhouse gives you links, you can use google etc.. how can anyone be so stupid that they don't understand this over so many days.. is there something seriously wrong with you?? are you just pulling my chain.. no one could seriously be that stupid??

HERE'S SOME HOMEWORK FOR YOU: you know what google is right?? go to google.com and type in martha steward grand jury.. then come back and tell my and everyone else what you found..
 
Yojimbo : can you please desist from casting personal insults at fellow members. Thanks.





Thanks for your co-operation.
 
limerickman said:
Yojimbo : can you please desist from casting personal insults at fellow members. Thanks.





Thanks for your co-operation.

did you mean Yojimbo or doctorSpoc? i think you meant me... sorry, i'll try to tone it down..
 
Apologies Yojimbo,
A case of mistaken identity.
My mistake.


GT : referring to fellow members as retards, is not on.

We're all adults here, lets keep things in perspective ok?

Thanks
 
GT Fanatic said:
Everybody hits a "BroDeal nerve." The dude's a complete tard. He gets upset with anyone who defends Lance, or doesn't think he's doping. The idiot called me an "asshole" in a different thread because I said the same thing, there's no evidence. Then, all of a sudden, I was a "Lance supporter." :rolleyes:

First off, I don't give a damn about Lance Armstrong. I've never met the man, I don't follow his career, and I don't care what he's done or hasn't done. Right down the middle, THERE IS NO PROOF.

Sorry, doping apologist, defender of omerta, and general douchebag, but just because you are willfully ignorant does not mean the rest of us cannot see the mountains of evidence that clearly prove that Armstrong is a doper. The two developers of the test for EPO, Robin Parisotto and Michael Ashenden, have both said that the 1999 retrospectively tested urine samples conclusively prove that Armstrong was using EPO.

You gotta love these Armstrong fanboys who try to gain credibility by claiming they are not fans. Here is a new one, someone who claims to barely know who Armstrong is because he does not follow Armstrong's career. Yeah, right. :rolleyes: He does not follow Armstrong but feels the unstoppable urge to defend his dope use on the Internet.
 
Bro Deal said:
Sorry, doping apologist, defender of omerta, and general douchebag, but just because you are willfully ignorant does not mean the rest of us cannot see the mountains of evidence that clearly prove that Armstrong is a doper. The two developers of the test for EPO, Robin Parisotto and Michael Ashenden, have both said that the 1999 retrospectively tested urine samples conclusively prove that Armstrong was using EPO.

You gotta love these Armstrong fanboys who try to gain credibility by claiming they are not fans. Here is a new one, someone who claims to barely know who Armstrong is because he does not follow Armstrong's career. Yeah, right. :rolleyes: He does not follow Armstrong but feels the unstoppable urge to defend his dope use on the Internet.

You like to hear yourself talk, too, don't you...

I couldn't even tell you which years Lance Armstrong won the Tour de France in! LOL!

You, sir, are the general douchebag. People in glass houses shouldn't cast stones. You should know this, defender of idiocy.
 
doctorSpoc said:
i don't particularly like lance armstrong, but what i REALLY, REALLY HATE is people stating STUPID, INCORRECT THINGS as if it's fact... you know like you do every time you put finger to keyboard?

but,, frig man.. YOU ARE INCREDIBLY STUPID.. you still haven't got it... a federal grand jury IS THE FRICK'N INVESTIGATION... federal grand jury do the investigation to see if charges can/should be laid... martha stewart and marion jones both lied to the investigators of A FEDERAL GRAND JURY.. for that they can charge you with a) obstruction of justice (for lying) or b) simply lying to a federal official is also a punishable offence as well.. i would imagine (see i distinguish the reach of my knowledge) that obstruction of justice carries a heavier penalty..

how can you read (i guess you haven't or simply have no reading comprehension to speak of) all these responses and not absorb ANY of it?? roadhouse gives you links, you can use google etc.. how can anyone be so stupid that they don't understand this over so many days.. is there something seriously wrong with you?? are you just pulling my chain.. no one could seriously be that stupid??

HERE'S SOME HOMEWORK FOR YOU: you know what google is right?? go to google.com and type in martha steward grand jury.. then come back and tell my and everyone else what you found..


You might want to take some of your own advice and read up on what the role of a grand jury is. You can call me every name you can think of but you still don't have a clue. Here's an excerpt from Wikipedia for you:

"A grand jury is meant to be part of the system of checks and balances, preventing a case from going to trial on a prosecutor's bare word. A prosecutor must convince the grand jury, an impartial panel of ordinary citizens, that there exists reasonable suspicion, probable cause, or a prima facie (legally sufficient) case that a crime has been committed. The grand jury can compel witnesses to testify before them. Unlike the trial proceedings, the grand jury's proceedings are secret; the defendant and his or her counsel are generally not present for other witnesses' testimony. A judge is not present either.[10] The grand jury's decision is either a "true bill" (meaning that there is a case to answer), or "no true bill"."

So the investigation is done by investigators, and evidence is presented to the grand jury by the investigator in order to have an indictment registered. Wrt to Martha Steward, as far as I have been able to find out, she was convicted of obstruction of justice by misleading an investigator. She was not convicted of perjury by lying to a grand jury under oath.

I await your apology, but I won't be holding my breath. Small people have trouble admitting their mistakes and you come across like a very small man.
 
GET SOME!@!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxEJ39aGqMg]YouTube - Pantera - Fuc%ing Hostile[/ame]


1, 2, 3, 4!

Almost every day
I see the same face
On broken picture tube
It fits the attitude
If you could see yourself
You put you on a shelf
Your verbal masturbate
Promise to nauseate
Today I'll play the part of non-parent
Not make a hundred rules
For you to know about yourself
Not lie and make you believe
What's evil is making love
and making friends
and meeting God you're own way
The right way

(Chorus)

To see
To bleed
Cannot be taught
In turn
You're making us
Ohhhh ******* hostile

We stand alone

The truth in right and wrong
The boundaries of the law
You seem to miss the point
Arresting for a joint?
You seem to wonder why
Hundreds of people die
You're writing tickets man
My mom got jumped -- they ran!
Now I'll play a public servant

To serve and protect
By the law and the state
I'd bust the punks
That rape steal and murder
And leave you be
If you crossed me
I'd shake your hand like a man
Not a god

(Chorus)

Come meet your maker, boy
Some things you can't enjoy
Because of heaven/hell
A ******* wives' tale
They put it in your head
Then put you in your bed
He's watching say your prayers
Cause God is everywhere
Now I'll play a man learning priesthood
Who's about to take the ultimate test in life
I'd question things because I am human
And call NO ONE my father who's no closer than a stranger

I won't listen

To see
To bleed
Cannot be taught
In turn
You're making us
*******, *******, *******
******* HOSTILE!