Show proof or shut up.

http://eurosport.yahoo.com/01072007/58/csc-threaten-jaksche-legal-action.html

Show proof or shut up.

http://eurosport.yahoo.com/01072007/58/csc-threaten-jaksche-legal-action.html

I wonder how many people can provide proof for any given conversation they've had with someone?

Furthermore, since Jaksche up until flipping was pretty hardcore Omerta, even making some great comments in regard to OP ("just because they have my blood in Fuentes office that doesn't mean I was going to dope"), it's not like he was probably secretly storing away some physical evidence or taping conversation b/c one day he planned on writing a tell-all book or something.

The only item I've read that suggests somebody doing something like this is Santuccione apparently videotaping his office (if I understood correctly) in the "Oil for Drugs" case.

CSC obviously has something to hide. Threatening people is not a way to get at the truth. Riis seems to want to protect his dopers.

CSC obviously has something to hide. Threatening people is not a way to get at the truth. Riis seems to want to protect his dopers.
Protect their client. Personally, (I didn't read the story in the link provided) I don't blame CSC for doing this. It doesn't mean they have something to hide necessarily. It could just be that they're providing themselves with protection against potential slander. Look, Manzano has said a lot of things too. Much is true, but some isn't.

Trust me, if you were in the same situation, you'd do the same thing.

BT

Protect their client. Personally, (I didn't read the story in the link provided) I don't blame CSC for doing this. It doesn't mean they have something to hide necessarily. It could just be that they're providing themselves with protection against potential slander. Look, Manzano has said a lot of things too. Much is true, but some isn't.

Trust me, if you were in the same situation, you'd do the same thing.

BT

What did Manzano say that's not true?

CSC will never sue, all kinds of nasty stuff will come out in the courtroom.

What did Manzano say that's not true?

CSC will never sue, all kinds of nasty stuff will come out in the courtroom.
But the costs and aggrivation of going to court can be a deterrent enough to pursuing it from Jascke's side.

Manzano recently came out discussing how many riders have died recently (directly implicating PE drug use) and in that same interview he also quoted side-effects of certain drugs which are not known to exist.

I don't doubt that most of what Manzano says is true, I just would caution against what can happen when all the facts are not checked. In his enthusiasm to tell his story, he either intentionally or unintentionally overstated some facts. Minor facts, mind you, but still it bears listening to all of this stuff with more than a little dose of skepticism.

BT

But the costs and aggrivation of going to court can be a deterrent enough to pursuing it from Jascke's side.

Manzano recently came out discussing how many riders have died recently (directly implicating PE drug use) and in that same interview he also quoted side-effects of certain drugs which are not known to exist.

I don't doubt that most of what Manzano says is true, I just would caution against what can happen when all the facts are not checked. In his enthusiasm to tell his story, he either intentionally or unintentionally overstated some facts. Minor facts, mind you, but still it bears listening to all of this stuff with more than a little dose of skepticism.

BT

Could you give some specifics? So much that Manzano said in his initial interviews with AS has been proven to be true I would not doubt anything he said that directly happened to him. I've also read some poor translations of his words by cycling news sites, so I would take those with a grain of salt.

And like I said, CSC won't sue. You can take that to the bank.

Just like Lefevre will never sue Het Nieuwsblad.

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=97031&highlight=manzano

There was a forum discussion on the VDB suicide attempt where Manzano (apparently) claimed that EPO could be to cause for some of the spate of depression that's been publicized. It turns out that EPO doesn't have a known side-effect of causing depression.

If you read the thread there is some question as to whether Manzano was referring to EPO (if so, he's wrong) or doping products in general (where he may be correct).

BT

Protect their client. Personally, (I didn't read the story in the link provided) I don't blame CSC for doing this. It doesn't mean they have something to hide necessarily. It could just be that they're providing themselves with protection against potential slander. Look, Manzano has said a lot of things too. Much is true, but some isn't.

Trust me, if you were in the same situation, you'd do the same thing.

BT
"...lawyers are doing what they are paid to do....Protect their client." That's one way of putting what lawyers do.

I agree with the others that CSC will never take this to court.

TF

CSC are a sponsor but the team itself is owned by Riis, so CSC aren't trying to protect "their team" but themselves by threatening a suit. Seems to be the favorite method of distancing yourself from somebody's comments these days.

CSC are a sponsor but the team itself is owned by Riis, so CSC aren't trying to protect "their team" but themselves by threatening a suit. Seems to be the favorite method of distancing yourself from somebody's comments these days.
I'm sure that they are refering to the team as CSC, not the company. The same as we would refer to Discovery, not - what is it? - Tailwinds? - TF