Bicileaks: Full Armstrong SCA Testimony

Deposition video

We posted selected clips anonymously leaked to us of Lance Armstrong’s SCA deposition a while back, and many of you rightly pointed out the bias in the editing. Our leaker must’ve heeded your comments, ’cause we got another flash drive in the mail with the full deposition video. Here it is, broken up into YouTube-friendly 15 minute segments. Brief summaries are included so you won’t have to slog through all 2 1/2 hours.

0:00 Swearing in, deposition ground rules explained.

3:00 "Do you have any ownership in Tailwind Sports?"

5:00 Why didn’t SCA pay the Armstrong bonus.

14:47 Start of line of questioning regarding Andreus.

 

0:00 Denial of Andreu accusations, details of ‘hospital room incident’.

2:00 Was never at the hospital without mother, Stapleton, Ochowicz.

4:30 "She (Betsy Andreu) said in her deposition she hates me."

5:30 Frankie Andreu supporting his ‘old lady’.

6:20 The Stapleton/Andreu tape.

8:35 If Stapleton was at the hospital room and knew it never happened, why didn’t he challenge Andreu?

9:20 Armstrong didn’t know of/order Stapleton and Knaggs to speak to Andreu.

10:55 Stapleton inconsistencies, did he know he was being taped.

13:30 Calling Frankie before his deposition.

0:00 Hospital room incident couldn’t have taken place.

1:30 Calling Stephanie McIlvain before her deposition.

3:30 Were there records at Indiana hospital regarding PED’s.

5:30 Ferrari line of questioning begins.

8:00 Frequency of Ferrari visits, method of payment.

9:30 Was Ferrari most significant coach?

11:12 Ferrari’s reputation addressed.

13:56 Mark Gorski uncomfortable with Ferrari association, was Ferrari kept in hiding.

0:00 Ferrari association was common knowledge.

1:11 Why wasn’t Ferrrari in "It’s Not About the Bike"?

2:48 Did Gorski warn Armstrong about Ferrari?

3:55 Ferrari is "totally clean, totally ethical".

5:25 The pre-empting of Walsh’s article detailing Armstrong/Ferrari ties.

8:30 Gorski uncomfortable with Ferrari.

12:00 Armstrong calls LeMond regarding LeMond comments about Ferrari.

13:00 LeMond has "serious drinking and drug problems."

14:11 "I don’t know for a fact, it’s pretty much common knowledge."

0:00 Was drug use common?

2:00 Why would LeMond make accusations against Armstrong?

3:13 Did Merckx introduce Armstrong to Ferrari?

4:05 Did LeMond dope?

5:16 Did Trek contact LeMond after their conversation? Why was Armstrong offended by LeMond comments?

6:30 Ferrari’s controversial comments.

8:00 Ferrari relationship terminated pending his conviction, how did Armstrong communicate with Ferrari, did he have a nickname for emails?

12:00 Schumi (Ferrari) "psyched’ about VAM test.

12:40 USA Today article, more on when Ferrari relationship first became public knowledge.

0:00 How Ferrari was paid.

1:25 Filippo Simeoni.

3:50 Tyler Hamilton and Ferrari.

6:00 Hamilton didn’t dope "when he was with our team".

6:38 Stephen Swart.

9:00 Chris Carmichael, Greg Strock.

10:30 Olympics, questions about Armstrong possibly being on Wade Exum’s ’92 list of positive coverups.

13:33 "I’ve never had an A sample positive."

14:50 Did Armstrong know in ’99 that there was no test for EPO?

0:00 Could athletes have taken EPO and gotten away with it in 2000? Postal samples from 2000 Tour were retroactively tested and were clean.

2:19 ’99 samples, l’Equipe story.

4:20 Dick Pound.

5:35 UCI is neutral, WADA is not.

7:25 UCI cash contribution.

8:20 Amount of contribution, method of payment, was the UCI notified of payment.

10:50 What did the UCI do with the money?

11:35 How did contributions become public? Why didn’t Armstrong make contributions public?

12:30 Armstrong’s style in his fight against doping.

14:00 Cortisone positive from ’99.

0:00 How much warning are you given before random controls?

1:20 "I was a favorite with the random controls."

2:18 Missed test in November.

5:06 Emma O’Reilly.

9:23 O’Reilly/Armstrong hematocrit discussion, who monitors hematocrit levels?

0:00 2000 investigation.

1:15 Terms of contracts.

3:00 Faith of cancer survivors.

6:40 Distinction between ‘not testing positive’ and being clean.

8:20 Swart race fixing allegations.

10:00 Why Emma O’Reilly made her accusations, was paid by Walsh.

11:00 "Afraid we were going to out her as a whore."

13:16 Indiana hospital contribution made in "recent weeks", timing of contribution relative to Andreu depositions.

0:00 Was Indiana contribution an attempt to buy silence?

1:40 Was a hypoxic tent used?

5:00 Possible explanation of pills Armstrong took in presence of Frankie Andreu.

6:55 Consequences of a positive test on endorsement contracts.

 

28 Comments

Dirk Diggler

On all of those videos, Ol’ Uninugget kinda looks & acts like he just walked off of a porn set, having sampled more than a few party favors and poontang.

Lance Armstrong

Man I look good!

Betsy is a fat hater and Greg is a bitter old drunk, everyone clear on that?

Domenico Bushing

Either LA had a bit of a head cold during this or he snorted a few lines before testifying.

Lance Armstrong

Wow, I thought the only video on the internet was porn and bike races. Who knew it could be used for this too?

Need to call Tim Herman

Luca Headset

Probably a bit unfair, but LA looks very shifty throughout this whole proceeding. Unfair because I guess when under the same oath as in a court of law anybody would want to be careful about what they say. I find some things frankly unbelievable about his testimony, however, just in some seemingly small ways: he says he’s never read David Walsh’s book, for example – what, hasn’t even got one of his lawyers to go through and red pen the controversial parts for him? That would be an inhuman lack of curiosity, I think, and at least a lack of preparation for the situation he is now in. If a bunch of people had made a bunch of allegations about me, which might lead to the kind of speculation that landed me in front of these questions in the video, then I’d at least read them. It would make no sense at all not to. I think it’s disingenuous of LA to say that. He did a similar thing at the press conference in which he had a go at Paul Kimmage, when he asked him his name; okay, he was obviously trying to say ‘you and what you write are of no importance to me – hey look, I don’t even know who you are’ but such a thing says more about LA at the end of the day. I hope the enquiry gets to the bottom of it. I don’t believe everythgin in DW’s book, and I don’t believe everything the Andreus and Jonathan Vaughters, Floyd Landis, etc have said, but there’s a hell of a lot of smoke there, and that can kill ya as well as fire.

Margaret

To say he was uncomfortable with questions would be an understatement. He couldn’t lie straight in bed as we say over here. Funny how everyone is a liar except him. Oh, and for someone so clever, how come there is so much he ‘can’t recall’? Like who got the money at UCI, how much it was, whether it was a one off payment or not? No Armstrong, you have burned your boats with your ‘answers’.

Benjamin Plug

If I’m gonna send you 25,000 in the ‘mail’ or wired, you can bet I’m gonna tell somebody on the business end of that check that I’m ‘sendin it to ya’. The UCI had to have known before lance put a stamp on an envelope or pressed return on a keyboard that cash was in the pipeline to their bank account. That line of questioning really got his attention I think.
And on another note – I noticed how his body language shifted some during the ‘missed control’ while in Cabo answers. To think today that Rasmussan went thru the shitter on this same offence. Lance said you get to miss three. Is this true? Cause last I checked if you miss one they rip you up, The DS suspends you from racing and all the bells and whistles.
He did however seem genuine when he admitted what was at stake if he were to be found guilty. I read this admission as a man trying to shape his own punishment. Ok, you lose endorsements, Livestrong would go away, blah blah blah. I didnt hear him say anything about jail time, bankruptcy, or any of the other harsh realities.
At the end of the day what we have is a person, that probably saved some lives with his donation to cancer research. The last decade had real progress. I cant see a person that has a foundation based on donations, not tell a recepient that they’re going to get some money to fight the cause kinda makes no sense to me. his answers seemed disingenuous. Could he be so hands off on his dealings that he doesnt pay attention of where his money goes? Is he the type of guy that finds 20.00 bucks in his pockets when he does the laundry? – correction – when somebody else does the laundry?

Cosimo Tank

Legally, there’s nothing here. Absolutely nothing. Glamourboy seems confidant, relaxed, and handled the lawyering pretty well. Doesn’t mean he’s clean, but there’s nothing incriminating in these videos. A suggestion Lance: use Kleenex.

Marco Supple

What is your fixation with this dude?

Why do you waste your time and resources to post worthless shit that has nothing to do with New York racing?

These videos haven’t been posted elsewhere because they’re WORTHLESS!

Why don’t you get it that ALL professional sports dope?!

If it wasn’t Lance then someone else would step up.

So much focus on one person only leads to demonizing him and not fixing the overall problem.

Please stop titillating us with USELESS shit like it’s valid information.

All you laymen lawyers, psychologists, and scientists don’t know shit, are you fucking kidding me?

When I read this site I want to move FAR away from you dooshes! You’re a bad example of NY racing and everyone is a fuckin’ hater.

Adam Sandler

Johan, is that you?

Sorry about that whole movie deal. It was out of my control. I see you’re still angry.

“Don’t Mess With the Johan” just didn’t have the same buzz.

Mirror mirror..

and then get your own fucking website and then you can publish whatever the fuck you want.

Bobby Bits

*Douches.

Marco Supple, If you’re going to berate the site and its followers, do us the courtesy of spelling your insults correctly.

They hurt more that way champ.

Gabriel Setscrew

distraction

all i know s that since LA retired, we have been getting tickets…

jus’ ‘ayin’

todo el piquete y ningunas pelotas

One of the downfalls of writing a book. I don’t know if you have ever written one? One of the downfalls of writing a book.

All Prick and no balls

SCA Lawyer

Lance I hope you don’t think I was being mean to you. I didn’t want to ask you any questions at all as I have all your books and your DVDs and posters. When I asked at then end where you were going on holiday, I was hoping I could maybe join you buddy.
Love, always and forever,,,,,,,xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Joe Public (dohh!)

I get to satisfy my Hate Lance fetish. Will carve out a couple hours this evening to watch on my big HD Flat panel tonight. Long live the hate! Hahaaahaa.

Stan Brazeon

The lawyer bumbled this one when he asked whether the riders monitored their hematocrit levels and Lance remarked that sometimes the team measured the levels, since the UCI monitors the level as possible evidence of doping.

The lawyer should have followed with:

Why would the team measure the level if the UCI monitors it anyway? This, of course, suggests that the team is trying to stay a step ahead of the UCI.

If the team measured a rider’s level and found it to be in excess of the doping limit (50%), then what would the team do about it? Any action by the team would be an attempt to cover a potential positive dope test.

Why would a rider of a hematocrit level above 50% in the first place? Of course, this suggests doping.

The lawyer was a complete softie and seemed to be start struck for most of the questioning.

Kylian Grips

“Why would a rider of a hematocrit level above 50% in the first place? Of course, this suggests doping.”

My normal hematocrit is between 46 and 48. When I use an altitude tent nightly, it is between 50 and 51.

Stan Brazeon

Technically possible, but clearly such a result would be an exception and would have to be examined on a case by case basis. Nevertheless, that’s the doping threshold, and also the threshold that rider’s who were doping with EPO made sure they were beneath.

Remi Setscrew

pretty boring stuff. I am no lance fan “but” at the end of the day the guy won the tour 7 times in a row. i don’t care if he doped or not that is a monumentally insane accomplishment. Zabel said he doped, he won the greeen jersey six times in a row and Milan SR 4 times – he is still a great rider, a great champion and probably a great guy IMHO. Whats interesting about all doping is that the riders themselves rarely complain about other riders being “fixed”. They realize and accept its part of the sport and if you want to win thats what you do. No clean rider has won the tour in the last 20 years with the possible exception of GL and bigmig, both of whom were genetic freaks. Lemonds VO2 max is the highest ever recorded -though i have heard some nordic skier bested it – and migs is right behind him. Just try to enjoy the sport for the beauty and spectacle that it is and let go of the hypocritical, sanctimonious, self righteous, holier than thou attitude. In the end it just doesn’t matter.

schmalz

Pinotti might disagree with that statement:

Pinotti Yes, but not in the moment—after they tested positive. Because you can’t think that the others are cheating if you don’t have proof, otherwise you create a reason for yourself to underperform. You can’t let yourself think about this. You just have to do what you can do. But at the point when they test positive, and when you think back, yeah, I feel like they stole something from me.

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2010/marco-pinotti-interview

Comments are closed.