Simeoni gives back national champ shirt

2»

Comments

  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    andyp wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    I suspect here that most of you normally wouldnt give a monkeys if the Italian champion was not riding the Giro . Its just another chance for you bandwagon jumpers to have a pop at LA and the Obsesssed One to get all the old links out again.
    I suspect you're probably right in most cases.

    But, once again a team, Ceramica Flaminia, takes part in all the initiatives the UCI mandate to ensure they can ride the races their sponsors are interested in, only to get snubbed at the last hurdle by teams, such as Xacobeo Galicia, who don't participate and don't really have any interest in the Italian market.

    Let's hope that the Vaughters initiative to get a common understanding between teams, race organisers and the UCI over which criteria actually apply to race entry is successful.

    That's a fair point, there does seem to be a whiff of burning martyr about Pippo, but Zomegnan's comments along the lines of "He had a chance to sort this out with Armstrong but he didn't" don't sit very comfortably with me.
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • leguape
    leguape Posts: 986
    aurelio wrote:
    leguape wrote:
    It's unreliable testimony from someone who changes their story depending on who they're speaking to.
    I think you meant to say, "Ìt is legally inadmissible evidence from someone who understandably `changed their story` when it was made clear to them that both they and their partner would be sacked from their jobs with Oakley if they refused to do so"...

    No I mean it's unreliable because she has directly contradicted what she said in testimony before a preliminary court hearing with conversations reported elsewhere. If the question is "is this witness' testimony reliable?" then the answer in her case is no because it is clear that she has offered contradictory evidence.

    As a point of law, her conversation is not necessarily inadmissable evidence. Under US federal law I believe it depends where the conversation took place and where it was recorded as to whether it is admissable. I seem to remember this came into play in the Kayle Leogrande case.
    http://www.atomicecho.com/cycling
  • don key
    don key Posts: 494
    Sorting things out with Armstrong involves having an undetectable heart beat. He is scum pesonified and his power means that his yes men wear identical outfits, devils indisguised.
    By supporting his endeavours you are also supporting (un)sporting fraud, it's quite simple stuff really, those wanting a sprinkling of his dandruff have similar cranial discrapencies.
  • aurelio_-_banned
    aurelio_-_banned Posts: 1,317
    leguape wrote:
    No I mean it's unreliable because she has directly contradicted what she said in testimony before a preliminary court hearing with conversations reported elsewhere. If the question is "is this witness' testimony reliable?" then the answer in her case is no because it is clear that she has offered contradictory evidence.
    `Reliable`, `Admissible`. Legal semantics apart, what really matters is that it is clear on listening to the recording that she is speaking with total sincerity.
  • leguape
    leguape Posts: 986
    aurelio wrote:
    leguape wrote:
    No I mean it's unreliable because she has directly contradicted what she said in testimony before a preliminary court hearing with conversations reported elsewhere. If the question is "is this witness' testimony reliable?" then the answer in her case is no because it is clear that she has offered contradictory evidence.
    `Reliable`, `Admissible`. Legal semantics apart, what really matters is that it is clear on listening to the recording that she is speaking with total sincerity.

    That's your expert opinion is it?

    See I'm happy to take Betsy Andreu as a credible witness as she seems to have been more consistent in her testimony, but someone who has said yes, no, yes and then refuses to comment when asked to clarify by NPR, throwing a legal rep in for good measure, doesn't seem like the sort of person I'd stand first in line when making a case.
    http://www.atomicecho.com/cycling
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    don key wrote:
    Sorting things out with Armstrong involves having an undetectable heart beat. He is scum pesonified and his power means that his yes men wear identical outfits, devils indisguised.

    Are we were talking about a murderer or rapist here ?...........hes a pro cyclist ffs get a perspective on it.
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    aurelio wrote:
    `Reliable`, `Admissible`. Legal semantics apart, what really matters is that it is clear on listening to the recording that she is speaking with total sincerity.

    I would put her on a par with Jeffrey Archer in terms of believability.
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • camerone
    camerone Posts: 1,232
    leguape wrote:
    aurelio wrote:
    leguape wrote:
    No I mean it's unreliable because she has directly contradicted what she said in testimony before a preliminary court hearing with conversations reported elsewhere. If the question is "is this witness' testimony reliable?" then the answer in her case is no because it is clear that she has offered contradictory evidence.
    `Reliable`, `Admissible`. Legal semantics apart, what really matters is that it is clear on listening to the recording that she is speaking with total sincerity.

    That's your expert opinion is it?

    See I'm happy to take Betsy Andreu as a credible witness as she seems to have been more consistent in her testimony, but someone who has said yes, no, yes and then refuses to comment when asked to clarify by NPR, throwing a legal rep in for good measure, doesn't seem like the sort of person I'd stand first in line when making a case.

    for heavens sake leguape, when will you realise that aurelio IS an expert on everything LA and that an opinion that differs from his is wrong. :wink:
  • teagar
    teagar Posts: 2,100
    DaveyL wrote:


    Doesn't have to be, but if Plod is going to nick someone on terrorism charges these days, it is more than likely he (and it will probably be a he as well though it doesn't have to be) will be Asian. Nothing like missing the point, though...

    I wasn't aiming for the point. :P

    I just like to point out casual racism from time to time.
    Note: the above post is an opinion and not fact. It might be a lie.
  • SpaceJunk
    SpaceJunk Posts: 1,157
    Moray Gub wrote:
    I suspect here that most of you normally wouldnt give a monkeys if the Italian champion was not riding the Giro . Its just another chance for you bandwagon jumpers to have a pop at LA and the Obsesssed One to get all the old links out again.

    Personally I wouldn't care if the Italian national champion was riding thr Giro or not. I do have an issue with the race director stating that he had 7 hours to talk to LA during the recent MSR .

    If anything Zomegnan's comments brought LA into the equation. I have more issues about the race director's comments than anything else.

    Could you imagine if LA wasn't allowed to ride the Giro because he didn't seek Simeoni out during MSR?

    How absrub would that be??

    Zomegnan has the right to say who races and who doesn't - just don't come up with lame excuses.
  • hommelbier
    hommelbier Posts: 1,555
    http://www.velo-club.net/article?sid=53936

    Seems like Simeoni 's protest has now earned him a 4 month ban for his gesture.

Categories