Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Lance Armstrong Under Oath

Here is an Armstrong statement under oath from 2005 in which he now may be charged with perjury.

Lance Armstrong never issued a reliable denial about his doping, yet his unreliable denials were often accompanied by attacking others.

This is a good reminder:

As a reliable denial has 3 components, attacking the accuser is not one of them.  Habitual Liars cannot bear being called a "liar" and will often strike back and attack the credibility of the accuser, rather than answer the fact.

Here he said he would lose his sponsors:

"All of them," Armstrong testified on Nov. 30, 2005. "And the faith of all the cancer survivors around the world. So everything I do off of the bike would go away too. And don't think for a second I don't understand that. It's not about money for me. Everything. It's also about the faith that people have put in me over the years. So all of that would be erased. So I don't need it to say in a contract you're fired if you test positive. That's not as important as losing the support of hundreds of millions of people."

Note that he does not need it to say in a contract, yet he is unable to bring himself to say that he did not dope. 

Armstrong's testimony came at the height of his fame – right after winning seven consecutive Tour de France titles from 1999 to 2005. During the deposition, Armstrong is by turns "confident, fluent, arrogant, combative and cocky," as described by McDermott, an Australian investigative reporter. Armstrong's lambastes his accusers, characterizing one of them – his masseuse – as a "whore."
"In one sense it is a tour de force -- a supremely confident display by a sportsman who clearly, at the time, regarded himself as untouchable," McDermott told USA TODAY Sports.


Tania Cadogan said...

What you say is true Peter.

The mccanns laughed off claims of child neglect claiming everyone leaves their kids home alone every night whilst on vacation, their listening checks were the same if not better than those performed by holiday firms ( not in PDL because they were outside the complex as were many other apartments) and they were told they were being responsible parents by some unnamed source.
However, Imply they were not being truthful and it is unleash the lawyers and sue and this includes the now ex lead detective, Anthony Bennett, Pat brown, sundry newspapers and media.

They can laugh in the face of accusations of neglect but not accusation they are liars.

Anonymous said...