Two former pro cyclists in a bar (Tyler Hamilton's lawyers notify feds)

[djg21]

This needs it's own thread.

Tyler Hamilton's lawyers notify feds
Email Print Comments294 By Bonnie D. Ford
ESPN.com

Tyler Hamilton's lawyers on Monday formally notified federal authorities about a weekend incident they consider to be "aggressive contact" initiated by Lance Armstrong, saying it is up to those authorities to decide whether it constitutes witness tampering.
. . . .

The two cyclists crossed paths at an Aspen, Colo., restaurant Saturday night, said Hamilton attorney Chris Manderson. He said Hamilton told him Armstrong repeatedly asked how much he had been paid to do the television interview, and added that his legal team would "(expletive) destroy you," "tear you apart on the witness stand," and "make your life a living (expletive) hell."

Read the complete article at http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=6658817


If this is true, Mr. Armstrong is an egomaniacal thug, and a complete and total asshole. No wonder his PR people are screwing the pooch in their efforts to defend him. Apparently, they do not, and cannot, control the guy.

Lance is going to self-destruct, and soon will be entering some silly sort of celebrity rehab for something.

[oldpotatoe]

Read the complete article at http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=6658817


If this is true, Mr. Armstrong is an egomaniacal thug, and a complete and total asshole. No wonder his PR people are screwing the pooch in their efforts to defend Lance. Apparently, the do not, and cannot, control the guy.

Lance is going to self-destruct, and soon will be entering some silly sort of celebrity rehab for something.

We know the main wine supplier for the restaurant so got an inside take on what happened. This guy called the restaurant owner and asked about it, she was at Lance's at the time having breakfast at the time(good friends of Lance).

Tyler thought Lance was out of town, owner called Lance and told him Tyler was in the restaurant, Lance came over..confronted Tyler as he was going to the 'loo.

It really wasn't a big deal, like the owner mentioned. Not surprised Lance confronted Tyler afterall, probably not the smartest thing to do but certainly understandable. No fists flew, words exchanged, not much more. Restaurant owner(remember good friend of Lance) told Tyler he was no longer welcome in the restaurant.

[Mikej]

Lance should have knocked him out for "Tugboat"

[firerescuefin]

If this is true, Mr. Armstrong is an egomaniacal thug, and a complete and total asshole.

.....not exactly breaking news.

[e-RICHIE]

We know the main wine supplier for the restaurant so got an inside take on what happened. This guy called the restaurant owner and asked about it, she was at Lance's at the time having breakfast at the time(good friends of Lance).

Tyler thought Lance was out of town, owner called Lance and told him Tyler was in the restaurant, Lance came over..confronted Tyler as he was going to the 'loo.

It really wasn't a big deal, like the owner mentioned. Not surprised Lance confronted Tyler afterall, probably not the smartest thing to do but certainly understandable. No fists flew, words exchanged, not much more. Restaurant owner(remember good friend of Lance) told Tyler he was no longer welcome in the restaurant.


does this cafe owner woman happen to resemble lance's mom atmo? that would speak volumes...

ps

arrange disorder

:o :o :D
:o :o :D
:D :o ;)

[JMerring]

to the list of hateful, 'agenda driven' allegations, we can now add incredible stupidity as well. what is it with rich and/or famous people doing things that would strike us regular folks as just plain dumb?

[Dekonick]

does this cafe owner woman happen to resemble lance's mom atmo? that would speak volumes...

ps

arrange disorder

:o :o :D
:o :o :D
:D :o ;)

Awesome!

[SPOKE]

does this cafe owner woman happen to resemble lance's mom atmo? that would speak volumes...

ps

arrange disorder

:o :o :D
:o :o :D
:D :o ;)

Made me laugh.....a bunch!

[thenewguy11]

Am I understanding this right? The restaurant owner called her friend Lance to tell him that Tyler was having dinner at the restaurant, with what I presume was the express purpose of having Lance come over and confront him? And then she tells Tyler that he's no longer welcome at the restaurant, even though she created the uncomfortable situation?

She's as big a tool as Lance in this instance.

[gdw]

Armstrong might be an ass and bully but he has more balls...er ball, than Hamilton.

[indyrider]

Armstrong might be an ass and bully but he has more balls...er ball, than Hamilton.

Ball(s) certainly don't equal brains.....

[firerescuefin]

This is what happens when someone drinks their own Kool-Aid and surrounds themselves with "enablers". Bullying/threatening a key witness in federal investigation of which you are subject doesn't reek of intelligence. Old habits die hard.

[Charles M]

So where did Ham come up with the money to eat at a place like that??

Still makin a living off dope...

[keevon]

Come on guys...

"It was like two dudes meeting serendipitously. It was not a big confrontation."
Just a couple of dudes... good enough for me! :rolleyes:

[e-RICHIE]

So where did Ham come up with the money to eat at a place like that??

Still makin a living off dope...



what does this mean atmo?

ps

arrange disorder

:) :) :)
:) :) :)
:) :cool: :p

[firerescuefin]

So where did Ham come up with the money to eat at a place like that??

Still makin a living off dope...

He makes a decent living from his personal coaching business (out of Boulder). I am sure that he was riding with clients/friends....plenty of people are still fans.

[johnnymossville]

Just two guys rolling around in the filthy underworld of professional wresting, I mean bike racing.

[JMerring]

So where did Ham come up with the money to eat at a place like that??

Still makin a living off dope...

my guess is he pulled cash or a credit card from his wallet, or was treated to the meal by a friend, client or business partner. i'd also guess that lance didn't hook him up (at least not for the meal).

[norcalbiker]

Too much expeculation. Too much media. Too much of what she said and what he said. Bottom line is they are both no longer competing in a high level of cycling. When you're making a good amount of money when you doing what you're good at and all of a sudden your career is over and have very little revenue, you tend to do or say things to make money because it is a rude awakening.

[William]

C-c-c-c-cat fight!!!! :banana:




William

[InspectorGadget]

Hamilton and Armstrong are idiots. Lance just keeps going out of his way to prove it.


e-RICHIE makes me laugh.

[rice rocket]

So where did Ham come up with the money to eat at a place like that??

Still makin a living off dope...

Book sales!

[torquer]

So where did Ham come up with the money to eat at a place like that??
My guess is that his disappearing twin was going to pick up the tab.
Wonder if he's not welcome back, either.

[benb]

Reading comprehension for the win.. the articles specifically mention TH is an employee of Outside Magazine now.

[mtnbke]

Am I understanding this right? The restaurant owner called her friend Lance to tell him that Tyler was having dinner at the restaurant, with what I presume was the express purpose of having Lance come over and confront him? And then she tells Tyler that he's no longer welcome at the restaurant, even though she created the uncomfortable situation?

She's as big a tool as Lance in this instance.

My favorite bit is that Hamilton and his friends were told never to come back and the reasons given were:

Rude to waitstaff.
Failure to tip.

They were asked to leave before finishing their meal. I've never been to a restaurant where you tip mid-meal.

The funny thing is that after being asked to leave the restaurant and never come back, Hamilton actually went ahead and paid the bill (including the tip).

I'll let you make your own decision regarding who is the class act here, and who is starting to look a lot like Roger Clemons.

[67-59]

I'll let you make your own decision regarding who is the class act here, and who is starting to look a lot like Roger Clemons.

How about neither is the class act here?

While we are currently being confronted with lots of evidence re: Lance, let's not forget Hamilton's years of lying about the whole vanishing twin nonsense, getting his fans to contribute to his legal defense fund even though he knew he was lying, and then finally admitting he doped. To the extent he is behaving now, I doubt it's for any purpose other than to try to make him into a more credible witness. Needless to say, that's quite an uphill battle....

[djg21]

We know the main wine supplier for the restaurant so got an inside take on what happened. This guy called the restaurant owner and asked about it, she was at Lance's at the time having breakfast at the time(good friends of Lance).

Tyler thought Lance was out of town, owner called Lance and told him Tyler was in the restaurant, Lance came over, confronted Tyler as he was going to the 'loo.
If this is true, I hope the asshole is prosecuted for attempting to intimidate a witness. This WAS NOT a serendipitous meeting. Rather, Lance, with the help of his restauranteur friend (who may look like Lance's mother and apparently frequents his home for "breakfast"), affirmatively sought out and confronted Tyler. Who cares about his alleged drug use? He's a stupid asshole.

He makes a decent living from his personal coaching business (out of Boulder). I am sure that he was riding with clients/friends....plenty of people are still fans.
According to the original material from Outside Magazine, he was in Aspen for a conference with Outside Magazine's (editorial) staff and was leading group rides. I'd guess that his meal was paid for by the Magazine.

[cmg]

so........if Lance confronted tyler's vanishing twin does this constitute attempting to intimidate a disappearing witness? where's the crime......? this is too much fun! maybe it was all an EPO induced dream. meeting took place in the last resturant at the end of the universe which happens to have a francise in colorado. this practically writes itself.

[gdw]

Pro cycling is a lame a** realty show without the skanky babes. One of the networks should lock the retired drama queens into a house for a month and film the action.

[bicycletricycle]

a-holes can b a real bummer.

[William]

Tyler needs a new riding buddy....

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_A9vYVSUPHhI/TOqjOTHRSsI/AAAAAAAAB7U/ZtdtA5vUA3A/s1600/arnold-bike.jpg





William :)

[Dekonick]

Tyler needs a new riding buddy....

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_A9vYVSUPHhI/TOqjOTHRSsI/AAAAAAAAB7U/ZtdtA5vUA3A/s1600/arnold-bike.jpg





William :)

Makes my arms look small...

[Mark McM]

Makes my arms look small...

His arms make my legs look small.

[e-RICHIE]

His arms make my legs look small.
Makes my arms look small...

he made his legacy small by tapping the help and getting caught atmo.

ps

arrange disorder

:o :o :D
:D ;) :cool:
:) :rolleyes: :p

[fourflys]

I tell you what... the sheer amount of.... umm, how do I say it? holier-than-thou attitudes amazes me... I've never been a pro cyclist or in any situation like that... I've never done PEDs or any kind of drugs... I've never had to live with the shame of the above compiled with lying to people about it... BUT, I have screwed up plenty in my life and eventually had to own up to it... I've counseled (not professionally) a few people in my service that screwed up with drugs or alcohol and had some pretty bad depression because of it... I've seen what living a lie can do a person/family...

I don't dare to try and understand or point blame/conjecture at Tyler, Lance, Pantani, or anyone that had been in these situations... unless you've been in some similar (and I bet most haven't), how can you even start to throw blame/accusations/slurs/jokes at someone who has? I'm not saying you have to be a fan or even like the people, but to say they are this or that because of what they did is preposterous...

I've said it before... there is only one being that is capable of judging us... and it's not me and I'm fairly certain it's not you...

sorry to sound a bit grumpy, but it just gets really old after a while...
:beer:

[echelon_john]

Because Lance is a douchebag?

I tell you what... the sheer amount of.... umm, how do I say it? holier-than-thou attitudes amazes me... I've never been a pro cyclist or in any situation like that... I've never done PEDs or any kind of drugs... I've never had to live with the shame of the above compiled with lying to people about it... BUT, I have screwed up plenty in my life and eventually had to own up to it... I've counseled (not professionally) a few people in my service that screwed up with drugs or alcohol and had some pretty bad depression because of it... I've seen what living a lie can do a person/family...

I don't dare to try and understand or point blame/conjecture at Tyler, Lance, Pantani, or anyone that had been in these situations... unless you've been in some similar (and I bet most haven't), how can you even start to throw blame/accusations/slurs/jokes at someone who has? I'm not saying you have to be a fan or even like the people, but to say they are this or that because of what they did is preposterous...

I've said it before... there is only one being that is capable of judging us... and it's not me and I'm fairly certain it's not you...

sorry to sound a bit grumpy, but it just gets really old after a while...
:beer:

[patrick8037]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but why would Tamilton go eat at a restaurant that is known to be owned by a good friend of Juan Pelota?

[Blue Jays]

"...Maybe I'm missing something here, but why would Tamilton go eat at a restaurant that is known to be owned by a good friend of Juan Pelota?..."Perhaps that is where his friends and coworkers from Outside Magazine wished to dine?
While I don't know the menu firsthand, that restaurant might also serve excellent food, too.

[merlincustom1]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but why would Tamilton go eat at a restaurant that is known to be owned by a good friend of Juan Pelota?

You're assuming Tyler knew. It seems to me a fairly obscure fact that a good friend of LA's happens to own a restaurant in Aspen. I doubt she's a friend. Lance has minions, not friends.

[Bud_E]

he made his legacy small by tapping the help and getting caught atmo.

ps

arrange disorder

:o :o :D
:D ;) :cool:
:) :rolleyes: :p

...and even smaller by pardoning Fabian Nunez's gangster thug son just before he left office.

[130R]

I tell you what... the sheer amount of.... umm, how do I say it? holier-than-thou attitudes amazes me... I've never been a pro cyclist or in any situation like that... I've never done PEDs or any kind of drugs... I've never had to live with the shame of the above compiled with lying to people about it... BUT, I have screwed up plenty in my life and eventually had to own up to it... I've counseled (not professionally) a few people in my service that screwed up with drugs or alcohol and had some pretty bad depression because of it... I've seen what living a lie can do a person/family...

I don't dare to try and understand or point blame/conjecture at Tyler, Lance, Pantani, or anyone that had been in these situations... unless you've been in some similar (and I bet most haven't), how can you even start to throw blame/accusations/slurs/jokes at someone who has? I'm not saying you have to be a fan or even like the people, but to say they are this or that because of what they did is preposterous...

I've said it before... there is only one being that is capable of judging us... and it's not me and I'm fairly certain it's not you...

sorry to sound a bit grumpy, but it just gets really old after a while...
:beer:


Glad someone said it.

[firerescuefin]

sorry to sound a bit grumpy, but it just gets really old after a while...

Chris...what gets old is watching Lance's act, which is why peoples' tolerance has wained, and their opinions become stronger. Lie for 11 years and be a complete bullying @ss while doing so, and it kind of turns people against you. There's no repentance there. If there was, then more people would buy what your selling.

[fourflys]

Chris...what gets old is watching Lance's act, which is why peoples' tolerance has wained, and their opinions become stronger. Lie for 11 years and be a complete bullying @ss while doing so, and it kind of turns people against you. There's no repentance there. If there was, then more people would buy what your selling.

I don't disagree...

my post above was actually more toward the Tyler bashers...

[Louis]

Altercation Between Armstrong and Hamilton Interests F.B.I.
By JULIET MACUR

The F.B.I. has requested surveillance video from a Colorado restaurant to glean more information about a recent confrontation there between Lance Armstrong and his former teammate Tyler Hamilton, according to the restaurant’s co-owner.

Jodi Larner, a co-owner of the French restaurant Cache Cache in Aspen, said in a telephone interview Tuesday that she spoke to an F.B.I. agent in the morning and that he told her she would be subpoenaed for the surveillance tape.

Federal authorities — who for a year have been investigating Armstrong for crimes relating to doping and cycling — are looking into whether the encounter between Hamilton and Armstrong on Saturday night constitutes witness tampering, said a person briefed on the matter. That person spoke on condition of anonymity because he did not want to jeopardize his access to sensitive information.

Hamilton, one of Armstrong’s teammates on the now-defunct United States Postal Service squad, is one of the witnesses in the case against Armstrong. Last year he testified against Armstrong to a federal grand jury meeting in Los Angeles. In an interview last month with CBS’s “60 Minutes,” he also detailed the alleged secretive systematic doping scheme by the Postal Service team.

Armstrong has a house in Aspen and eats at Cache Cache about three times a week, Larner said. Hamilton, in Aspen as part of an event sponsored by Outside Magazine, was dining on the restaurant’s patio Saturday night.

Larner, a friend of Armstrong’s, said the videotape would have images only from the kitchen area of her restaurant, so she doubted that it would help the F.B.I. because the confrontation occurred in the bar area. “I wish I had the incident on tape, so the whole world could see what happened between Tyler and Lance, and shut up about it already,” she said. “It was a nonevent.”

Hamilton, the 2004 Olympic gold medalist, was on his way to see a friend at the bar when he and Armstrong came face to face, said Chris Manderson, Hamilton’s lawyer. Armstrong threw out his arm to block Hamilton and began berating him, Manderson said.

“Would you feel threatened if someone said to you, ‘We’re going to destroy you on the witness stand and we’re going to make your life a living hell?’ ” Manderson said. “Not a lot of shades of gray there.”

On Monday Manderson contacted federal authorities to notify them of the incident. He said they spoke to him about the issue more than once that day. As of Tuesday afternoon Armstrong had not been contacted by any federal authorities seeking his side of the story.

Larner said Armstrong and his girlfriend, Anna Hansen, were having tequila drinks at the bar with Larner and two other friends when Hamilton walked by the bar at about 10 p.m. Armstrong stopped him and said, “ ‘Hey dude,’ in a very sarcastic tone,” and Hamilton, looking shaken, tried to hug Armstrong, Larner said.

Larner said she did not hear the rest of the conversation, but that Armstrong never left his barstool while he and Hamilton spoke.

Tony DiLucia, a patron and local real estate broker who was standing next to Armstrong and Hamilton, also said he could not hear the conversation. He said, though, that he could tell by their body language that the exchange was not combative.

“It looked like two guys having an intense conversation, but Lance never stood up and Hamilton just stood there,” DiLucia said. “In my honest estimation, I never saw any aggressive stuff happen at all. If things were heated, you’d figure Lance would at least get up.”

After the confrontation, DiLucia was invited to sit down with Armstrong to have drinks with him. Hamilton went back to his patio table and had coffee and dessert.

Larner said she later told Hamilton that he was not welcome back at her restaurant because the group he was with did not tip their server. The next day, she said, she returned to work to find a series of threatening voicemails on the restaurant’s answering machine because she had stood up for Armstrong Saturday night. She said she planned to contact the local sheriff about them.

[Jeff N.]

Tyler needs a new riding buddy....

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_A9vYVSUPHhI/TOqjOTHRSsI/AAAAAAAAB7U/ZtdtA5vUA3A/s1600/arnold-bike.jpg





William :)"I need your clothes and your bicycle."

[rphetteplace]

I say this was a set up by Outside magazine. Put TH in LA's favorite haunt. Publicize it (It's on TH's website that he'd be in Aspen) and sit and wait for fireworks. My guess is one of the Outside editors will coauthor TH's book.

[djg21]

Altercation Between Armstrong and Hamilton Interests F.B.I.
By JULIET MACUR

The F.B.I. has requested surveillance video from a Colorado restaurant to glean more information about a recent confrontation there between Lance Armstrong and his former teammate Tyler Hamilton, according to the restaurant’s co-owner.
. . . .

Larner said she later told Hamilton that he was not welcome back at her restaurant because the group he was with did not tip their server. The next day, she said, she returned to work to find a series of threatening voicemails on the restaurant’s answering machine because she had stood up for Armstrong Saturday night. She said she planned to contact the local sheriff about them.

First, can you provide or link for this.

Second, it is a very bad idea to post entire articles. Websites such as the one hosting this forum are now being sued because people have posted articles from newspaper websites or other sources. If you are curious, google the term "Righthaven."

To avoid copyright issues, always provide a link to encourage readers to visit the hosting website, never quote more than a few sentences from the article (so your posting is more likely a "fair use" under copyright law), and provide attibution.

Finally, and back on topic, the name of the Restaurant is Cache Cache, and it's address and telephone are available at: http://cachecache.com/ According to its website, Lance's "friend" Jodi Larner, "has firmly established the clientele and attributes the success of the restaurant to these faithful patrons who have supported Cache Cache for so long." I guess we now know how Ms. Larner went about establishing her clientele.

I don't think I'll ever visit, but if you are inclined, I'd bet it takes reservations.

[wc1934]

So where did Ham come up with the money to eat at a place like that??

Still makin a living off dope...

From the money you, me, and the rest of the dummies who contributed to his defense fund - and I really thought he might have a twin.

[MarleyMon]

First, can you provide or link for this.

I read it in the NYT

[CunegoFan]

So where did Ham come up with the money to eat at a place like that??

Still makin a living off dope...

Better than making a living telling lies to people with terminal disease.

[djg21]

I read it in the NYT

the link is at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/sports/cycling/altercation-between-lance-armstrong-and-tyler-hamilton-interests-fbi.html?_r=2

The spin has started.

[Louis]

The comments on the NYT story read one heck of a lot like our LA discussions here...

[Dekonick]

The comments on the NYT story read one heck of a lot like our LA discussions here...

I disagree - most of the posts either show disdain for the $$ spent chasing such fodder (and I kinda agree) but I saw more folks blindly defending LA...
I feel that most that actually follow and know the sport recognize LA for what he has shown himself to be - a bully. Talented absolutely.. never a doubt.. but a doper like most of the top pros... and more importantly - an a$$hole bully...

I have forever lost any respect I had for him *AND I USED TO HAVE A TON*

TH, on the other hand, is the small guy getting beat down hard - even after coming clean. He tried to keep up the LA image... and couldn't do it despite his twin... but has come clean. You can accuse him all you want... but he honestly has way more to lose than gain by this... and the fact other posties corroborate the accusations... Ill leave it to you....

You can deny all you want... eventually someone finds a dress covered with evidence...

[Louis]

I didn't bother to add up pro LA vs pro TH and how that compared to the opinions here. I was primarily thinking about emotional content of many of the comments here and there.

I'm honestly surprised that so many folks still care that much about it.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . I feel that most that actually follow and know the sport recognize LA for what he has shown himself to be - a bully. Talented absolutely.. never a doubt.. but a doper like most of the top pros... and more importantly - an a$$hole bully...

I have forever lost any respect I had for him *AND I USED TO HAVE A TON*

TH, on the other hand, is the small guy getting beat down hard - even after coming clean. He tried to keep up the LA image... and couldn't do it despite his twin... but has come clean. You can accuse him all you want... but he honestly has way more to lose than gain by this... and the fact other posties corroborate the accusations... Ill leave it to you....

You can deny all you want... eventually someone finds a dress covered with evidence...

. . . but Dekonick voices my feelings exactly. Armstrong has shown in a whole string of incidents over a long period of time what kind of person he is off the bike. There are so many that even if half of them were spun totally wrong, that still leaves more than enough to paint a picture of a bully with some real issues--and I don't mean just dating women who look like his mother.

Also agree about who has more to lose. Tyler has already lost his career with whatever honors went with it. He was quoted saying when he looks back on his career he feels only pain.

He's also lost his wife, many friends, and probably most of any financial reward from that career. Whatever book deal he has--if there really is one and it's not just another smear spin from LA's team--could not possibly raise enough to replace whatever he has lost financially.

He has way more to lose in terms of whatever respect any fans had for him and whatever smear LA's team of legal and PR assassins could do to him, but he still came forward after the grand jury, even though there was no compelling legal reason that I know of for him to do so.Why would he do that?

Maybe to . . . do the right thing?

That alone in my mind places him head and sholuders above LA.

BBD

[Ray]

I didn't bother to add up pro LA vs pro TH and how that compared to the opinions here. I was primarily thinking about emotional content of many of the comments here and there.

I'm honestly surprised that so many folks still care that much about it.
I think anyone who put a lot of faith in any of these guys at any point as anything other than great athletes is gonna feel disillusioned and burnt now. I never had that problem - I've always assumed that everyone at the highest levels of the sport doped for pretty much the whole time there were at that level. So I'm never disillusioned. And if you doped, you lied about it at some point too, because that's part and parcel with doping - as with adultery. So if you don't care that they doped, you can't care too much that they lied about it. If you care deeply that they doped, well, cycling isn't the spectator sport for you! Then again, what is? Badminton? And the best of those folks probably have some help too.

But if you really really really believed these guys were racing clean at that level and are heartbroken by the truth and the realization of the lies and deception (and doping), then I can understand still having hard feelings about it. I'm amazed by the level of denial that could get you to such a place, but I understand the strong feelings nonetheless.

I personally have an easy way of dealing with it all. If they claim they never doped, I assume they're lying. If they admit they doped I assume they're telling the truth. So I believe Tyler was lying before and is telling the truth now. I believe that Floyd was lying before and is telling the truth now. I believe that Lance was lying before and is still lying. I don't think these guys get character points for telling the truth - they only do it when they have to out of pure self-interest. But I still believe its the truth and the fact that they lied before doesn't make it less true now.

Does anyone really believe Anthony Weiner was telling the truth before and is lying now? Or that he's lying now that he came clean just because he admits he was lying before? Sometimes it all just seems pretty freakin' obvious. And so no, I can't get too worked about it either. But I can understand how you would if you actually believed these guys in the first place.

-Ray

[Mr. Squirrel]

i hear this is a good place for nut soup.

mr. squirrel

[majorpat]

. . . Maybe to . . . do the right thing?

BBD


Do right and fear no man...

[oldpotatoe]

Am I understanding this right? The restaurant owner called her friend Lance to tell him that Tyler was having dinner at the restaurant, with what I presume was the express purpose of having Lance come over and confront him? And then she tells Tyler that he's no longer welcome at the restaurant, even though she created the uncomfortable situation?

She's as big a tool as Lance in this instance.

Yep and yep....Pretty small community, Aspen, kinda strange as I hear it as well. This coming from somebody who lives in the 'Peoples Republic of Boulder', 35 square miles surrounded by reality.

[Ray]

This coming from somebody who lives in the 'Peoples Republic of Boulder', 35 square miles surrounded by reality.
Reality sucks - I'll take Boulder...

-Ray

[lemondsteel]

I started going to aspen 35+ yrs ago when properties were high but not unreasonable. No big hotels, no golden arches, no Fur Salons. Just good ol' locals that cared and treated guess like people should. I'd go backpacking there and also watched The Red Zinger and Coors Classic multiple times. Managed to meet Eddie Merckx, Greg Lemond, Rebecca Twigg and others. Fun times. But................ it now saddens me to go there, it is money, money, money! Or should I say Cache, Cache, Cache. Most everyones nose is in the air and the now infamous "Restaurant" is a classic example of what's wrong with Aspen. You have deep pockets, as LA does, you buy your friends and your level of acceptance. It is so Sad! As for LA, sure he doped. TH, no doubt about him. Cyclists have doped since the classics began. You get caught or you luck holds and you don't. Surely, at some time, the advance in detection and processes wil catch up with the money it takes to cover it up and stay one step ahead. My 2 cent, for what it worth.

[67-59]

I'm surprised by all the support Hamilton is getting in this thread.

Some say that he has everything to lose and nothing to gain by coming forward. But then others chime in (supposedly to agree), and explain that he has already lost pretty much everything (wife, friends, respect, money). So if he has already lost basically everything worth having, how is it that he has so much more to lose by coming forward? And nothing to gain? He already seems to have gained quite a lot by his admission -- getting some people (including many here) to believe that he really is a good guy after all. And he also has plenty to gain in terms of reputation if he can show that "everybody" doped, including the guy who won the Tour seven times. That seems like quite a lot to me, especially for a guy who has already lost most everything.

Here is my theory: Tyler and Lance are basically the same. They both decided to do whatever they could to win, including doping. And they both decided that if they ever got accused or caught, they would do pretty much anything they could to refute the allegations...fighting them with whatever resources they had.

And that's where the difference lies: Lance simply has more resources available than Tyler, and therefore is able to fight longer and harder.

Ask yourself these questions: If Tyler still had millions of dollars at his disposal and an entourage willing to corroborate everything he says, do you really believe he would have come clean? Or if the world had believed his initial lie about the vanishing twin, would he still have come forward now to "do the right thing"? My belief is that he would still be fighting -- just like Lance -- if he had the resources. And that if the world had believed his initial lie and stopped asking questions, he would have smirked and kept quiet.

Maybe I'm totally wrong. Maybe Tyler would have admitted doping now even if he still had millions of dollars at his disposal and scores of "friends" corroborating his story. Maybe he would have admitted doping even if we had believed his vanishing twin story all along. But maybe not....

[Ray]

Ask yourself these questions: If Tyler still had millions of dollars at his disposal and an entourage willing to corroborate everything he says, do you really believe he would have come clean? Or if the world had believed his initial lie about the vanishing twin, would he still have come forward now to "do the right thing"? My belief is that he would still be fighting -- just like Lance -- if he had the resources. And that if the world had believed his initial lie and stopped asking questions, he would have smirked and kept quiet.
I think you're clearly right - Tyler said as much in the 60-minutes interview. There was a point when he said something to the effect of 'I don't WANT to be telling all of this about Lance right now - I'd have continued to dope and lie right along with him if I hadn't gotten busted'. Those aren't the exact words, but that was the jist of it.

I don't defend or condemn Tyler - I didn't believe him then and I do believe him now. I don't think the fact that he's admitted lying in the past hurts his credibility now - everyone who dopes lies about it - its just part of doping to lie about it. I don't think Tyler was a terrible person before and a good one now. I think Tyler's basically an OK guy who did a terrible job of lying. I don't condemn Lance for doping or lying about it either, but I do condemn Lance for a lot of the really A-hole and thuggish things he's done over the years. I loved him during his first victory or two and then as stories about his personal behavior started coming out, I lost a HUGE amount of respect for him and he's done nothing but make that worse over the years. There's a small part of me that hopes he goes down for this stuff just because it couldn't happen to a nicer guy. There's a much larger part of me that doesn't give a rip what happens to him.

The sport is what the sport is - you either love it or hate it as it is. My opinion of those who think its ever been different or ever will really be different is that they must have a rich fantasy life.

-Ray

[fourflys]

and there again, most of us can only guess as what it really means for these two... as I said, unless you've walked in those exact shoes...

[67-59]

I don't defend or condemn Tyler - I didn't believe him then and I do believe him now. I don't think the fact that he's admitted lying in the past hurts his credibility now - everyone who dopes lies about it - its just part of doping to lie about it. I don't think Tyler was a terrible person before and a good one now. I think Tyler's basically an OK guy who did a terrible job of lying. I don't condemn Lance for doping or lying about it either, but I do condemn Lance for a lot of the really A-hole and thuggish things he's done over the years. I loved him during his first victory or two and then as stories about his personal behavior started coming out, I lost a HUGE amount of respect for him and he's done nothing but make that worse over the years. There's a small part of me that hopes he goes down for this stuff just because it couldn't happen to a nicer guy. There's a much larger part of me that doesn't give a rip what happens to him.

The sport is what the sport is - you either love it or hate it as it is. My opinion of those who think its ever been different or ever will really be different is that they must have a rich fantasy life.

-Ray

Yes, Lance certainly has a history of doing "A-hole and thuggish things," and I have also lost a lot of respect for him over the years. But as you pointed out, many of those things happened after he had started winning the Tour. So is Lance just a fundamentally bad person, or is his behavior at least partially a result of huge success and piles of money? My guess is that both are factors, but who knows?

I agree with you on your last point - the sport is what it is, so take it or leave it. There was once a time when I believed - and wanted to believe - that guys could stay clean and win the big races. I've gotten past that, and now watch just to enjoy the competition....

[67-59]

and there again, most of us can only guess as what it really means for these two... as I said, unless you've walked in those exact shoes...

Indeed. But taking a news story, guessing what it really means, and then discussing it is a large part of what internet message boards are all about. This would be a pretty quiet forum if posts could only be made by those with first-hand or inside knowledge of the situation.

[cdimattio]

... My opinion of those who think its ever been different or ever will really be different is that they must have a rich fantasy life.

-Ray

While I would agree that the sport has never been different, the comparative impact has changed.

While the stimulants and steroids of a prior era might make a difference in a one day event, the comparative benefits to a grand tour would seem more limited.

Newer drugs alter physiology.

[firerescuefin]

My opinion of those who think its ever been different or ever will really be different is that they must have a rich fantasy life.
-Ray

Ray, I have got to be friends with a couple of folks that are pro tour sport physiologists that completely disagree with your future assessment. Curious what your background is?

[Ray]

While I would agree that the sport has never been different, the comparative impact has changed.

While the stimulants and steroids of a prior era might make a difference in a one day event, the comparative benefits to a grand tour would seem more limited.

Newer drugs alter physiology.
No argument, but I don't think that changes the basic balance, which is that these guys use whatever advantage they can find because they're all so supremely talented and relatively close together in ability that if just one guy did it, he'd win everything. So they all do it, and the cream still rises to the top. The technology changes but the underlying issues aren't much different. The strongest and smartest guys still tend to win and I suspect they're the same ones who would have won without doping, with previous and more limited types of doping, or with the supercharged doping we'll see in another 20 years.

-Ray

[Ray]

Ray, I have got to be friends with a couple of folks that are pro tour sport physiologists that completely disagree with your future assessment. Curious what your background is?
I have a lifetime of skepticism behind my non-scientific assessment. :cool: I don't think the underlying issue is physiological, I think its psychological, and I don't see human psychology changing much. And I think we'll always have adulterers and wars too. Its an outlook on human nature that informs me, not science. Everyone is entitled to their own guesses.

-Ray

[bicycletricycle]

Ray, I have got to be friends with a couple of folks that are pro tour sport physiologists that completely disagree with your future assessment. Curious what your background is?

maybe he just thinks that people will always try to gain an advantage over the competition in a competitive situation. I would tend to agree.

[firerescuefin]

maybe he just thinks that people will always try to gain an advantage over the competition in a competitive situation. I would tend to agree.

agreed. Human component will always be there. I do believe that the sport /can will become clean(er), with most riders being clean. Call me a hopeless romantic.

[weiwentg]

If this is true, I hope the asshole is prosecuted for attempting to intimidate a witness. This WAS NOT a serendipitous meeting. Rather, Lance, with the help of his restauranteur friend (who may look like Lance's mother and apparently frequents his home for "breakfast"), affirmatively sought out and confronted Tyler. Who cares about his alleged drug use? He's a stupid asshole.


According to the original material from Outside Magazine, he was in Aspen for a conference with Outside Magazine's (editorial) staff and was leading group rides. I'd guess that his meal was paid for by the Magazine.

To be fair, let's assume you had not doped, and then got falsely accused of doping by an ex-teammate. If Lance is innocent, then as long as he threw no punches (or at least not the first punch), most folks would probably let things slide if he exchanged a few words with Tyler.

For the record, I think he was doped to the gills. But at this point, it's he said, he said. No charges have been filed. I'm going to ride my bike real hard this evening.

[67-59]

agreed. Human component will always be there. I do believe that the sport /can will become clean(er), with most riders being clean. Call me a hopeless romantic.

I would like to believe that too, but unfortunately I think Ray is right. As long as high-level athletes are competitive and closely matched, there will be motivation to shave off a few seconds, so people will look for ways to cheat and stay one step ahead of the enforcement. Maybe the cheating will wax and wane a bit, as new detection capabilities lead to brief periods where the cheaters are less successful. But ultimately, they'll keep trying. Human nature is a powerful force....

[Ray]

I do believe that the sport /can will become clean(er), with most riders being clean. Call me a hopeless romantic.
I thought I already did. :D :D :D

-Ray

[Dekonick]

To be fair, let's assume you had not doped, and then got falsely accused of doping by an ex-teammate. If Lance is innocent, then as long as he threw no punches (or at least not the first punch), most folks would probably let things slide if he exchanged a few words with Tyler.

For the record, I think he was doped to the gills. But at this point, it's he said, he said. No charges have been filed. I'm going to ride my bike real hard this evening.

How many accusations does it take before you begin to think that there just may be some truth? Even if 3/4 of them are made up, some of them aren't. I can't see big George lying... and there are so many anecdotal bits and pieces that it makes you begin to wonder. If I find a couple of feathers here and there... scattered in my yard... and then I see a fat cat... and near that cat there are more feathers... but the fat cat has an owner that swears up and down that he NEVER eats birds...

Hmmm.... perhaps the cat didn't eat THIS bird, but it sure looks that way to me.

Just how I see it. LA is a doper, and I really could care less about that... it is his actions as a person that make me think he is a real turd.

[e-RICHIE]

I would like to believe that too, but unfortunately I think Ray is right. As long as high-level athletes are competitive and closely matched, there will be motivation to shave off a few seconds, so people will look for ways to cheat and stay one step ahead of the enforcement. Maybe the cheating will wax and wane a bit, as new detection capabilities lead to brief periods where the cheaters are less successful. But ultimately, they'll keep trying. Human nature is a powerful force....
if you believe this above now, than at what point in your life did you believe in this below?
<cut>There was once a time when I believed - and wanted to believe - that guys could stay clean and win the big races. I've gotten past that, and now watch just to enjoy the competition....
what caused the paradigm shift atmo?

ps

arrange disorder

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :p
:rolleyes: :) :cool:
:o :D :cool:

[67-59]

if you believe this above now, than at what point in your life did you believe in this below?

what caused the paradigm shift atmo?

ps

arrange disorder

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :p
:rolleyes: :) :cool:
:o :D :cool:

It's hard to put a finger on when my opinion changed -- really it was more a matter of my suspicion increasing over time.

The trigger was basically just the volume of evidence. More people testing positive, more accusations that the people who tested negative really doped. When you really want to believe something, it's easy to ignore a smaller number positives as outliers, and a smaller number of accusations as sour grapes. But as more people test positive, and more people come forward with accusations, it becomes more and more difficult to believe there isn't some truth there.

Or maybe I'm just getting more cynical as I get older....

[djg21]

To be fair, let's assume you had not doped, and then got falsely accused of doping by an ex-teammate. If Lance is innocent, then as long as he threw no punches (or at least not the first punch), most folks would probably let things slide if he exchanged a few words with Tyler.


I disagree completely (maybe with most folks).

Mr. Armstrong is well counselled, and undoubtedly was been advised by his attorneys not to engage in communications with anyone but his legal team re: his alleged trafficking in or use of PEDS. Lance also undoubtedly was advised not to engage in further communications with Tyler or his other accusers, so as not to make any admissions that could be offered against him in a court of law.

Lance also had to know better than to affirmatively search out a confrontation with Tyler. Self-help is always a bad idea, and if Armstrong believes the allegations made by Tyler are demonstrably false, his recourse lies in a court of law -- not in a public confrontation and a possible physical altercation.

Indeed, if the allegations of Lance's encounter with Tyler are true, and I underscore my use of the conditional "if" as there are now a number of competing and contradictory descriptions of the encounter being offered, his effort to intimidate a witness could amount to an admission of his guilt of the underlying offense(s).

[Clydesdale]

I didn't read the whole thread and assume someone already caught this?

The FBI now wants the tape of the incident.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cyc_armstrong_doping

[weiwentg]

I disagree completely (maybe with most folks).

Mr. Armstrong is well counselled, and undoubtedly was been advised by his attorneys not to engage in communications with anyone but his legal team re: his alleged trafficking in or use of PEDS. Lance also undoubtedly was advised not to engage in further communications with Tyler or his other accusers, so as not to make any admissions that could be offered against him in a court of law.

Lance also had to know better than to affirmatively search out a confrontation with Tyler. Self-help is always a bad idea, and if Armstrong believes the allegations made by Tyler are demonstrably false, his recourse lies in a court of law -- not in a public confrontation and a possible physical altercation.

Indeed, if the allegations of Lance's encounter with Tyler are true, and I underscore my use of the conditional "if" as there are now a number of competing and contradictory descriptions of the encounter being offered, his effort to intimidate a witness could amount to an admission of his guilt of the underlying offense(s).

Yes, self-help is always a bad idea. But if Lance is innocent, don't forget he's been persecuted by L'Equipe, by Greg Lemond, by countless people, and now by Floyd and Tyler. If he exchanged words with Tyler, this would be somewhat understandable imo. As I said, though, if he threw the first punch (or even any punches), he would be in the wrong.

In any case, you're correct that we don't know what went down.

[weiwentg]

How many accusations does it take before you begin to think that there just may be some truth? Even if 3/4 of them are made up, some of them aren't. I can't see big George lying... and there are so many anecdotal bits and pieces that it makes you begin to wonder. If I find a couple of feathers here and there... scattered in my yard... and then I see a fat cat... and near that cat there are more feathers... but the fat cat has an owner that swears up and down that he NEVER eats birds...

Hmmm.... perhaps the cat didn't eat THIS bird, but it sure looks that way to me.

Just how I see it. LA is a doper, and I really could care less about that... it is his actions as a person that make me think he is a real turd.

BS. cats don't and can't swallow birds whole. you would have found a body. no body, you must acquit.

[Grant McLean]

We know the main wine supplier for the restaurant so got an inside take on what happened. This guy called the restaurant owner and asked about it, she was at Lance's at the time having breakfast at the time(good friends of Lance).

Tyler thought Lance was out of town, owner called Lance and told him Tyler was in the restaurant, Lance came over..confronted Tyler as he was going to the 'loo.



It will be interesting if the allegation is true that Lance actually made a trip
to the restaurant to confront Tyler. The NYT piece quoted someone from
the bar area saying Lance never left his seat, making it sound like he was
there in the restaurant. The whole thing is a giant soap opera.

-g

[ultraman6970]

Well it is a thing of ask for the phones registries to the phone company, if a phone came up from the restaurant to LA phone around the time Tyler was there, it is more than obvious that it was true and they will look like crap. Again :P

[oldpotatoe]

It will be interesting if the allegation is true that Lance actually made a trip
to the restaurant to confront Tyler. The NYT piece quoted someone from
the bar area saying Lance never left his seat, making it sound like he was
there in the restaurant. The whole thing is a giant soap opera.

-g

It's not illegal for Lance to make the trip to the restaurant, then confront Tyler. As long as there were no overt threats at bodily harm, Lance can say whatever he wants to Tyler. 1ST amendment type stuff. Lance isn't a witness, he ihasn't been charged with anything. At this point he's just a citizen confronting an accuser.

[Vientomas]

18 USC 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant

(a)
(1) Whoever kills or attempts to kill another person, with intent to—
(A) prevent the attendance or testimony of any person in an official proceeding;
(B) prevent the production of a record, document, or other object, in an official proceeding; or
(C) prevent the communication by any person to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation, parole, or release pending judicial proceedings;
shall be punished as provided in paragraph (3).

(2) Whoever uses physical force or the threat of physical force against any person, or attempts to do so, with intent to—
(A) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding;
(B) cause or induce any person to—
(i) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding;
(ii) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impair the integrity or availability of the object for use in an official proceeding;
(iii) evade legal process summoning that person to appear as a witness, or to produce a record, document, or other object, in an official proceeding; or
(iv) be absent from an official proceeding to which that person has been summoned by legal process; or
(C) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation, supervised release, parole, or release pending judicial proceedings;
shall be punished as provided in paragraph (3).

(3) The punishment for an offense under this subsection is—
(A) in the case of a killing, the punishment provided in sections 1111 and 1112;
(B) in the case of—
(i) an attempt to murder; or
(ii) the use or attempted use of physical force against any person;
imprisonment for not more than 30 years; and
(C) in the case of the threat of use of physical force against any person, imprisonment for not more than 20 years.

(b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to—
(1) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding;

(2) cause or induce any person to—
(A) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding;
(B) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding;
(C) evade legal process summoning that person to appear as a witness, or to produce a record, document, or other object, in an official proceeding; or
(D) be absent from an official proceeding to which such person has been summoned by legal process; or

(3) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation [1] supervised release,,[1] parole, or release pending judicial proceedings;

shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

(c) Whoever corruptly—
(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or
(2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

(d) Whoever intentionally harasses another person and thereby hinders, delays, prevents, or dissuades any person from—
(1) attending or testifying in an official proceeding;
(2) reporting to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation [1] supervised release,,[1] parole, or release pending judicial proceedings;
(3) arresting or seeking the arrest of another person in connection with a Federal offense; or
(4) causing a criminal prosecution, or a parole or probation revocation proceeding, to be sought or instituted, or assisting in such prosecution or proceeding;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both.

(e) In a prosecution for an offense under this section, it is an affirmative defense, as to which the defendant has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence, that the conduct consisted solely of lawful conduct and that the defendant’s sole intention was to encourage, induce, or cause the other person to testify truthfully.

(f) For the purposes of this section—
(1) an official proceeding need not be pending or about to be instituted at the time of the offense; and
(2) the testimony, or the record, document, or other object need not be admissible in evidence or free of a claim of privilege.

(g) In a prosecution for an offense under this section, no state of mind need be proved with respect to the circumstance—
(1) that the official proceeding before a judge, court, magistrate judge, grand jury, or government agency is before a judge or court of the United States, a United States magistrate judge, a bankruptcy judge, a Federal grand jury, or a Federal Government agency; or
(2) that the judge is a judge of the United States or that the law enforcement officer is an officer or employee of the Federal Government or a person authorized to act for or on behalf of the Federal Government or serving the Federal Government as an adviser or consultant.
(h) There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section.
(i) A prosecution under this section or section 1503 may be brought in the district in which the official proceeding (whether or not pending or about to be instituted) was intended to be affected or in the district in which the conduct constituting the alleged offense occurred.
(j) If the offense under this section occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense charged in such case.
(k) Whoever conspires to commit any offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.

[Auk]

Reread the statute. Tyler has already testified, so there is no influencing of the testimony (yet to be testified to) and there is no delay, as again, he's already testified.

That said, it was a dick move on his part.

[goonster]

Reread the statute. Tyler has already testified, so there is no influencing of the testimony (yet to be testified to) and there is no delay, as again, he's already testified.
He has testified to the grand jury, but we all expect him to be called to testify in a trial, if an indictment is filed.

[Vientomas]

There is a grand jury investigation.

If the grand jury hands down an indictment there will be a trial.

If there is a trial, Tyler will most likely be a witness.

For the purposes of this section—
(1) an official proceeding need not be pending or about to be instituted at the time of the offense.

Care to try again Auk?

[Auk]

Sure, but as you may be aware, depending on the side of the courtroom that you sit, you will read the statute in a different way. A turn of the tense of the words can and will be argued and can mean vastly different outcomes. Testifying is a present tense, testified is past. Just as I've pointed out in my original post. Doubtful that Hamilton will be called to testify again, otherwise you probably wouldn't have seen him on 60 minutes. But then, you already knew that I'm sure.

And try again? *** are you implying?


There is a grand jury investigation.

If the grand jury hands down an indictment there will be a trial.

If there is a trial, Tyler will most likely be a witness.

For the purposes of this section—
(1) an official proceeding need not be pending or about to be instituted at the time of the offense.

Care to try again Auk?

[MattTuck]

I still think this is one of the best commercials he did.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIl5RxhLZ5U

"What am I on? I'm on my bike bustin' my ass 6 hours a day. What're YOU on?"

[William]

I still think this is one of the best commercials he did.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIl5RxhLZ5U

"What am I on? I'm on my barstool bustin' Tyler's ass for 6 minutes the other day. What're YOU on?"


Fixed it for you. ;) :D



William

[merlincustom1]

Sure, but as you may be aware, depending on the side of the courtroom that you sit, you will read the statute in a different way. A turn of the tense of the words can and will be argued and can mean vastly different outcomes. Testifying is a present tense, testified is past. Just as I've pointed out in my original post. Doubtful that Hamilton will be called to testify again, otherwise you probably wouldn't have seen him on 60 minutes. But then, you already knew that I'm sure.

And try again? *** are you implying?

Before everyone gets all chest-puffy, I think "try again" implies that you read the statute wrongly, just as your "reread the statute" was an implication that Vientomas read it incorrectly. For what it's worth, the Vientomas read is correct. If LA's confrontation with Tyler was intended to dissuade him from testifying in an upcoming trial, it fits within the statute. Otherwise, the qualifying language Vientomas pointed out to you would have no meaning.
If criminals could intimidate witnesses into not testifying at trial on the premise that they did not intimidate them before their grand jury testimony, the statute becomes an absurdity.

[djg21]

Reread the statute. Tyler has already testified, so there is no influencing of the testimony (yet to be testified to) and there is no delay, as again, he's already testified.

That said, it was a dick move on his part.

Reread the statute. Tyler testified at a grand jury. If an indictment issues, there very well could be a trial, at which Tyler will be called as a witness. If Lance made a special trip to the restaurant in an effort to seek out Tyler, I'd throw the book at him if it were my grand jury and prosecution.

On edit: sorry for the redundancy. You guys beat me to the punch!

[Grant McLean]

It's not illegal for Lance to make the trip to the restaurant, then confront Tyler. As long as there were no overt threats at bodily harm, Lance can say whatever he wants to Tyler. 1ST amendment type stuff. Lance isn't a witness, he ihasn't been charged with anything. At this point he's just a citizen confronting an accuser.

I wasn't suggesting any illegality.
Mostly just wondering if the early media reports
gave others the impression the same impression
I had, that it was a meeting by chance.

If Lance did seek out a confrontation, it sort of tells
me what i need to know about the guy. The fact that
Tyler apparently attempted to give Lance a hug is
interesting too.

-g

[BengeBoy]

Lance is an amateur at this.

If you're going to contact a witness shortly before getting indicted by a grand jury, this is how to do it:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/john-edwards-sought-millions-heiress-rachel-bunny-mellon/story?id=13861284

[Mark McM]

On possibiity is that the investigation of witness intimidation might just be a legal ploy, rather than end in itself. An investigation for intimidation could be used as legal grounds to obtain search warrants or subpeanas that couldn't be gotten for the original investigation. Also, the statuate of limitations might be running out on some of the charges being investigated (some of which are over 10 years old), but under certain racketeering clauses new activities involving old crimes (such as attempts to cover-up evidence) can "reset the clock" for prosecutions.

[Dekonick]

On possibiity is that the investigation of witness intimidation might just be a legal ploy, rather than end in itself. An investigation for intimidation could be used as legal grounds to obtain search warrants or subpeanas that couldn't be gotten for the original investigation. Also, the statuate of limitations might be running out on some of the charges being investigated (some of which are over 10 years old), but under certain racketeering clauses new activities involving old crimes (such as attempts to cover-up evidence) can "reset the clock" for prosecutions.

Interesting...

[BumbleBeeDave]

Interesting...

. . . and quite likely very true.

What I find interesting are the alleged witnesses who imply that since there was no flagrant confrontation with loud voices or flying fists, there was therefore no intimidation.

Everything that it's claimed Lance said, such as "My legal team will ****ING destroy you" and such could have been said very quietly and been far more intimidating than if they had been said loudly.

It also stretches belief that this encounter was strictly by chance. Fortunately the federal investigators are good enough that they likely WILL subpoena phone records of the restaurant owner and discover if she indeed did call to alert Lance that Tyler was in the restaurant.

BBD

[CunegoFan]

As long as there were no overt threats at bodily harm, Lance can say whatever he wants to Tyler. 1ST amendment type stuff. Lance isn't a witness, he ihasn't been charged with anything. At this point he's just a citizen confronting an accuser.
Not true. There are all sorts of ways that pressure can be exerted that does not involve bodily harm. The most common and perhaps the most effective ones are financial. Armstrong has a history of punishing those he sees as his enemies. The Andreus are an example.

[ultraman6970]

True, i know you guys arent familiar with this guy Mario Kreutzberger (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Francisco_%28television_host%29) , in over 40 years of tv career he had done stuff that is unbelievably low in the financial department with people that he did not liked or with comedians he got problems with, even he started his career with one comedian in specific, at come point they walked their separate ways and just by magic trick, the guy couldn't get work no more, the same when he started doing his show in miami, basically ran over other people, so there are so many ways to "screw up" and pressure some body that sometimes is just better get a hit on the face straight forward because the other ways are way more harmful.

By the way his show sucks now hahaha, not even similar to what it was 30 years ago :D And as LA, he does a pretty good work helping people also, his campaigns to help disabled people are incredible good (teleton foundation) so who do you believe then?

I'm sure there must be other also.

[Lifelover]

... Armstrong has a history of punishing those he sees as his enemies. The Andreus are an example.

+1 Frankie hasn't had a a decent job since his run in with Lance.

Poor Kid.

[indyrider]

+1 Frankie hasn't had a a decent job since his run in with Lance.
Poor Kid.


Hey I think its time you change your handle to "Lancelover" as you seem to be his last and only holdout here on the forum. You're ridiculous.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . when the intelligent conversation tails off and the personal attacks begin it's time to shut it down and move on. Not cool, indyrider. :no:

So that's what I'm doing.

BBD

[Pete Serotta]

I am at the Ride the Rockies and beleive as oldpotatoe said. Like or not like i find it as he and others did. It is aLong stretch for me to believe this is witness intimidation. As to 60 minutes , I watched it and if it was me that tyler was talking about, i would be not happy.

From what I heard out here, no physical things happened. Lance showed up to a place he normally shows up.

Courts will determine outcome and appeals. Not us.

Like or not like Lance style it is not intimidation that legally affects Tyler. Both are big boys and have been "around the block" of life in the past. Time will tell outcome and not the personal verbal attacks that we were evolving to.

Feel free to open another thread and stay civil. Pete


[QUOTE=BumbleBeeDave . . when the intelligent conversation tails off and the personal attacks begin it's time to shut it down and move on. Not cool, indyrider. :no:

So that's what I'm doing.
Ws
BBD[/QUOTE]