http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/more/03/31/bc.cyc.armstrong.lawsuit.ap/index.html

and if he really had this 'scoop' why didn't he use it to leverage his settlement with LA.
Sounds like a disgruntled employee getting back at his boss. Let me guess he doesn't have any proof.

and if he really had this 'scoop' why didn't he use it to leverage his settlement with LA.
Sounds like a disgruntled employee getting back at his boss. Let me guess he doesn't have any proof.


OMG, there's a Doping Forum now? I had no idea. Great. Was it really that acrimonious that the break had to be made?

Oh well, as a Politics Only guy I guess I should understand.

One question (let's pretend I'm really naive here) but why does a man with nothing to hide have his employees sign a confidentiality agreement that makes them liable for $1million?

sponsorship payments, endorsement deals, training techniques, nutrition, maybe he is a ladies man. why does any multimillion dollar coporation (which He is) have confidentiality agreements?
silly.
Convicting a person simply because they protect themselves legally is lame.

or is every person who makes their fiancee sign a pre nup guilty of something as well?

so answer my question. If you had the truth and damning evidence, wouldn't you have used it to settle your differences?

or

why would a man with something to hide not pay his assistant to shut up?

men with something to hide settle out of court

One question (let's pretend I'm really naive here) but why does a man with nothing to hide have his employees sign a confidentiality agreement that makes them liable for $1million?

Everyone, and I mean everyone, has stuff that they don't want dragged out on the Oprah show, Jerry Springer, and the tabloids. He does have kids and everyone would like to have one small hope of some private life. It is so unreasonable to like to keep some supermarket check-out ragsheets from posting photos of his girlfriend nude for example as popped up here last week? Some "friends" will take advantage of their position and cash in. I know you don't like him, but the guy is entitled to have a private life.

just asking a question - thanks for the intelligent answers

it detracted from race talk. I and Francois figured they needed a home.

just asking a question - thanks for the intelligent answers


Actually, I just read the SI article more closely. The confidentiality provision, at least from the tone of the article, appears to be in conjunction with settlement of the lawsuit, which is actually unfortunately a common occurrence.

I do generally like your posts, so if it seemed unduly negative or personal, I offer my apology.

One question (let's pretend I'm really naive here) but why does a man with nothing to hide have his employees sign a confidentiality agreement that makes them liable for $1million?

Anyone see the 60 minutes program about the Carolina Panthers players and all the HGH and testerone prescriptions? Christ.

Anyone see the 60 minutes program about the Carolina Panthers players and all the HGH and testerone prescriptions? Christ.

Alll lies, didn't you hear the NFL say how much they test, surely they would have been caught if they were doping :)

it detracted from race talk. I and Francois figured they needed a home.


OK by me, Now I know.

They were interviewing that mechanic/friend and according to the reporter, his story sounded like it had some holes in it.

What I don't get, and perhaps the lawyers among us could explain, is why the mechanics own lawyer would let him go in front of the camera's to give his story. I mean, if you're wrong or proven to be falsy accusing someone, I gotta believe that hyping your own case is going to cost you (financially) big time. I suppose that by "coming forward now" could be part of a plan to leverage a settlement (I'm thinking cynically here) but the cost if it's not proven will be huge.

Thoughts?

BT