Armstron's Statement Annotated
- From: "Cyclonaught" <Cyclonaught100@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 08:16:07 -0700
"Today's article in the New York Times was a blatant attempt to associate me
and implicate me with a former teammate's admission that he took banned
substances during his career. The recycled suggestion that former teammates
took EPO with my knowledge or at my request is categorically false and
distorted sensationalism."
-----------------------------------------------------------
That's one interpretation. The article focused on Andreu and Mr. X and
raised the specter that Postal was not the clean team Armstrong always
claimed it was with their zero tolerance policy toward drug use.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"My cycling victories are untainted; I didn't take
performance enhancing drugs, I didn't ask anyone else to take them and I
didn't condone or encourage anyone else to take them. I won clean."
----------------------------------------------------------------
Untainted? To only the diehard Armstrong believers. The rest is contested.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Despite the fact I am the most tested athlete in the history of sport,
despite my numerous court victories and undefeated court record, and despite
the fact that I raced and won clean and fair, my accomplishments and name
attract attention and remain frequent targets of distortion and
sensationalism. Today is a prime example.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent events have shown that it is virtually meaningless to raise the
tested/never found positive defense. Armstrong has settled cases, not
obtained "court victories." The one case that did go to a decision, in
France, was won by Walsh and the publishers of his book, LA Confidential."
In fact, after the latest Times article, it is looking more and more as
though Walsh put the story down correctly.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The allegations re-run today are not new and I defeated them in court."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect. These are new admissions (not specific allegations against
Armstrong personally) by Andreu who has testified previously under oath and
and as yet unnamed former teammate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The implication that drug use was common knowledge on the Postal team is
untrue.
In a recent arbitration in Dallas, I proved I never used, asked or
encouraged anyone to take drugs. I had over 600 team-related colleagues
during my cycling career; of those, only 2 testified for the accusers and
none of those involved any proof that I used, or requested others to use,
performance enhancing drugs or that drug use was a part of the team. The two
teammates mentioned by name in the article today, Frankie Andreu and Stephen
Swart, both gave testimony under oath. The article implies that I asked or
encouraged Andreu to take drugs. Andreu's sworn testimony, however, shows
that is categorically untrue; Andreu testified that a) he had no knowledge
that I ever took any performance enhancing substance; b) had no reason to
believe I had ever done so; c) had never been told by any reliable source
that I had done so; d) that I never mentioned, much less suggested, adopting
a doping regimen; and e) that the only observation of drugs (among the
hundreds of races in which Andreu had participated with me as both a
teammate and roommate on the road) (Andreu was a teammate from approximately
1993 to 2000, while Swart rode for only one year, 1995) was a single
occasion taking caffeine."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Andreu testimony must be viewed in light of Andreu's recent revelations.
It in no manner proves that Mr. Armstrong was not using drugs or encouraging
same.
Mr. Armstrong's attorneys have done a good job of characterizing Andreu and
Swart's testimony for their own purposes. They ignore the
allegations/recollections of teammate X.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Andreu testimony:
Q: Did he (Armstrong) indicate to you that he was going to use EPO or
consider using EPO?
A: No.
Q: Was there any discussion between you and Mr. Armstrong regarding EPO or
the use of EPO during that time period?
A: No.
Q: '94, '95 time period?
A: No.
Q: Did anyone on the team tell you that they knew Mr. Armstrong was using
EPO during that time period?
A: No.
Q: Did you ever have a discussion with Mr. Armstrong about whether or not
you should use EPO?
A: Did I ever have a discussion with Lance about whether or not I should
use EPO?
Q: Yes.
A: No.
Q: Did he ever recommend or say you should do EPO?
A: No.
Q: Did he ever ask for your input about whether or not he should use EPO?
A: No
Andreu also refuted the claim by Swart that there was some sort of doping
program on the team:
Q: First, tell us who Mr. Swart is.
A: He was a member on the Motorola cycling team for -- I don't know how
many years, but I was on the same team with him for a while.
Q: In the book, he says that it was agreed or discussed in the 1995 --
early 1995 time period that himself, Mr. Armstrong, and possibly others
decided that they would have a medical or doping program, and that each
would obtain his own doping products to try to improve their performance. Do
you have any information regarding the truth of those statements?
A: I don't remember ever having a meeting like that, no."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andreu's recollection that members of the team decided that they needed to
dope to be competitive is supported by Max Testa's recollection in the Times
article and the statements of Dr. Prentice Steffen.While Andreu testified
that he did not remember such a meeting, he did testify about a conversation
with Armstrong regarding the Indiana hospital occurance alleged by Andreu
and his wife and off the record confirmed to the Oakley representative who
may have perjured herself. That conversation was alleged by Andreu to have
occurred a year later on a training ride.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The article also quoted Andreu's wife falsely asserting that Andreu took
drugs for me. That never happened, and even Frankie Andreu himself issued a
statement after the article ran where he refuted his own wife, saying "I
took drugs to help myself, not to help anyone else." The article attempts to
describe Betsy Andreu as testifying involuntarily and under subpoena; the
truth, however, is that:
a) she voluntarily and without subpoena traveled to Dallas from Michigan
to testify against me;"
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Contradicted by the statements of the Andreu's attorney and the subpoenas
issued after a mothion to quash them failed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
" b) she carried a note saying she hated me;
c) she contacted the insurance company defendant 15 times within the space
of a month;
d) she contacted Greg LeMond and his wife over 100 times in less than a
year attempting to bring me down; and
e) she described the hospital incident without emotion, then sobbed while
re-telling the story less than an hour later, when her testimony was being
filmed."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Betsy Andreu clearly has no use for Armstrong. Her testimony is supported
indirectly by the alegations of teammate X.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Now she attempts to bring me down by somehow attributing her husband's
conduct to me. It's just not true."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Misrepresentation. She says her husband did it to support Armstrong.
Andreu says he did it for himself, but he did do it to aid him in supporting
Armstrong as a Postal domestique.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"With success comes skeptics, detractors, and attacks of guilt by
association, particularly in today's climate. I raced and won clean. I know
it and have fought and proved it. I want the millions of cancer patients and
survivors with whom I battle cancer to know these allegations are still
untrue and to be assured that my victories were untainted and that they,
too, have reason to hope for a full, healthy and productive future."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
To be taken for what it may or may not be worth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lance Armstrong
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Armstron's Statement Annotated
- From: mrsixtypercent
- Re: Armstron's Statement Annotated
- Prev by Date: Re: Floyd speaks (video too)
- Next by Date: Re: Someone Please Inform Johan
- Previous by thread: SSDD at UCI
- Next by thread: Re: Armstron's Statement Annotated
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
