Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lance Armstrong Reportedly Tied to Performance-Enhancers in Recording
Fanhouse ^ | 9/16/10 | Hal Spivack

Posted on 09/16/2010 8:13:41 AM PDT by truthandlife

Federal authorities have reportedly obtained an important piece of evidence linking Lance Armstrong to performance-enhancing drugs. Greg LeMond (pictured), a three-time Tour de France winner, secretly recorded a telephone call six years ago with a woman close to Lance Armstrong who was in Armstrong's hospital room in 1996 when he told cancer doctors about his use of performance-enhancing drugs, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Armstrong, who won a record seven consecutive Tour de France titles, has repeatedly denied ever using performance-enhancing drugs or doping.

The recording and a transcript of the telephone call are expected to be presented to a federal grand jury in Los Angeles that is looking into allegations of drug use in professional cycling.

Sources told the Los Angeles Times that the woman who engaged in the phone call with LeMond is Stephanie McIlvain, who served as Armstrong's liaison at Oakley and was a confidant. Prosecutors have already subpoenaed McIlvain.

LeMond originally called McIlvain with the intention of talking to her about other business. But the telephone call switched gears shortly after when LeMond asked McIlvain exactly what happened in the hospital room with Armstrong in 1996.

During the telephone conversation McIlvain asked LeMond if he was taping the article, to which he responded "no."

According to the Los Angeles Times article, LeMond says on the phone call, "I know what I heard from a source outside of the group here of what, um, happened at the hospital.... I'm not asking you to do anything you would never want to do, but, you know, if I did get down where it was ... a lawsuit ... would you be willing to testify?"

McIlvain responded: "If I was subpoenaed, I would. ... I'm not going to lie. ... I was in that room. I heard it. ... My whole concern is my loyalties to Oakley. ... They say I was never in there. And I know I was in there. You know, I totally know I was in there."

According to LeMond's wife Kathy, the tape was made in July 2004. Greg LeMond has reportedly given prosecutors the taped conversation with McIlvain along with tens of thousands of documents corroborating evidence against Armstrong.

The true story in regards to what Armstrong actually told doctors in 1996 has been in dispute since 2004, when a book came out noting that Armstrong's former teammate, Frankie Andreu, and his wife, Betsy, who were also present in the 1996 hospital room, said they also heard Armstrong's admissions to using performance-enhancing drugs. Earlier this summer, Betsy Andreu told prosecutors and the Los Angeles Times that she thinks McIlvain has not spoken out about the situation to not jeopardize her career with Oakley.

In a 2005 Texas civil case deposition, McIlvain denied ever hearing Armstrong make an admission of using performance-enhancing drugs or doping. She did not return calls to the Los Angeles Times.

Betsy Andreu, though, has also provided federal prosecutors with voice mail tapes that reportedly have McIlvain apologizing for lying in the 2005 Texas civil case deposition.

In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, one of Armstrong's legal representative notes that, "Greg LeMond's illegal tape is the stalest of all the stale news to emerge from this inquiry so far: Ms. McIlvain disavowed this during her 2005 sworn deposition, and Mr. LeMond violated California law when he made the tape in yet another of his pathetic attempts to settle old cycling grudges."

The Los Angeles Times also reported that legal expert Laurie Levenson noted that calls can be used as evidence in federal cases as long as one of the parties in the taped call is not reluctant to using it.

In other Lance Armstrong news, the head of the French anti-doping agency, Pierre Bordry, has said that he will fully cooperate with the U.S. in their investigation into Armstrong and doping.


TOPICS: Extended News
KEYWORDS: armstrong; cycling; drugs; ped
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

1 posted on 09/16/2010 8:13:47 AM PDT by truthandlife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Wow!! This is like fifth hand information! And, it’s 14 years old!!!!


2 posted on 09/16/2010 8:18:01 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Things will change after the revolution, but not before.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Cheaters prosper.


3 posted on 09/16/2010 8:18:11 AM PDT by babble-on
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Hearsay.


4 posted on 09/16/2010 8:20:31 AM PDT by carton253 (Ask me about The Stainless Banner - a free e-zine dedicated to the armies of the Confederacy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leilani; Baynative; commish; llevrok; Mr. Blonde; luv2ski; Wyatt's Torch

More Lance drugth doo-wa.


5 posted on 09/16/2010 8:21:10 AM PDT by Ready4Freddy (Am working on plans for a Knights Templar Community Center next to the Kaaba in Mecca.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
“...when he told cancer doctors...”

Dr./Patient privilege!
Inadmissible!

6 posted on 09/16/2010 8:24:04 AM PDT by G Larry (I'd rather see the voters write off Obama!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Armstrong is the White Whale to Lemond’s Ahab. It’s been driving Greg insane for years.


7 posted on 09/16/2010 8:24:04 AM PDT by Paine in the Neck (Napolean fries the idea powder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

And a guy can’t have an honest discussion with his attending physician without a knucklehead blabbing to the world.


8 posted on 09/16/2010 8:24:26 AM PDT by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Sounds like a major HIPPA violation.
You can go to JAIL for that, news agency can get fined big bucks for that.

Shameless that someone would report what you told your doctor...


9 posted on 09/16/2010 8:25:29 AM PDT by Robbin (If Sarah isn’t welcome, I’m not welcome, it’s just that simple…)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Oh my, there’s possibly doping in cycling?
Who’d have known?
Who’d have cared?


10 posted on 09/16/2010 8:25:31 AM PDT by Joe Boucher ((FUBO) Less gubmint is best gubmint. I wants my free gubmint cheese)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
I find it hard to believe a Doctor would ask a patient about the use of illegal drugs while civilians not bound by doctor-patient privilege were in the room.

However, what I found funny was this:

McIlvain responded: "If I was subpoenaed, I would. ... I'm not going to lie. ... I was in that room.

Coupled with this: In a 2005 Texas civil case deposition, McIlvain denied ever hearing Armstrong make an admission of using performance-enhancing drugs or doping.

Since the tape was made in 2004, and the deposition was made in 2005, either McIlvain lied to Lemond, or she lied to Lemond, on that tape. Because she said both that she heard Armstrong, and that she would not LIE if she was called to testify.

But the next year when called to testify, she said she didn't hear him. So either "I heard Armstrong" was a lie, or "I won't lie" was a lie.

On the other hand, maybe Armstrong DID talk about performance-enhancing drugs. There are drugs that enhance your performance but that were not illegal in 1996; Also, he might have been ASKED about them, and talked about how different ones could effect his cancer-treatment, without saying he actually USED them.

Or, maybe he had actually USED them at some point before his cancer treatment, in which case his insistance that he NEVER used them would be a lie, but would hardly make a difference unless he used them after his cancer treatment.

11 posted on 09/16/2010 8:25:36 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

*Yawn*


12 posted on 09/16/2010 8:26:25 AM PDT by dfwgator (Rangers Magic Number - 8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
a woman close to Lance Armstrong who was in Armstrong's hospital room in 1996 when he told cancer doctors about his use of performance-enhancing drugs, the Los Angeles Times reported.

He won all his Tours after his cancer treatments.

13 posted on 09/16/2010 8:26:25 AM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Boucher

14 posted on 09/16/2010 8:26:31 AM PDT by billorites (freepo ergo sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Also, didn’t the cancer treatment itself involve using drugs that are normally considered performance-enhancing? In which case the discussion could well have been about what types of drugs were being used, and whether they would disqualify him from racing.


15 posted on 09/16/2010 8:26:37 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry
"Dr./Patient privilege! Inadmissible!"

No privilege if the statement was made in the presence of a third party who is not part of the physician's health care staff.

16 posted on 09/16/2010 8:27:55 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

If he knowingly made the statement to his doctor in the presence of a third party, the physician is still bound to confidentiality, but the third party is not.


17 posted on 09/16/2010 8:29:46 AM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: circlecity

LOL....our replies were virtually identical, and came right after each other, so I had to check out your profile page. Looks like we signed up on FR one day apart....welcome aboard, noob! ;-)


18 posted on 09/16/2010 8:32:15 AM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

So, she committed perjury in the deposition?


19 posted on 09/16/2010 8:37:20 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
"So, she committed perjury in the deposition?"

In the 2005 case? It would appear so, if what she told LeMond is the truth.

20 posted on 09/16/2010 8:41:36 AM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Old: We beat the Russians to the moon because our German rocket scientists were better than their German rocket scientists.

New: My favorite athlete won because he had better drugs than your favorite athlete.

Does anybody really respect athletics any more?

Really?


21 posted on 09/16/2010 8:42:39 AM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
Greg LeMond needs some counseling to get over all this....he just won't let this go and the world will remember him a whiner/nut case and not a champion cyclist.....
22 posted on 09/16/2010 8:45:41 AM PDT by Kimmers (Tell a lie often enough it becomes political........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: carton253

hearsay but certainly fits doesn’t it?


23 posted on 09/16/2010 8:46:03 AM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

This is old news - old as in Frankie Andrieu’s wife told this story a long time ago. It is known. It was in 2006 and Lance was discussing his post cancer treatment with EPO and steroids with the doctors who proscribed the treatment. All the cycling entities and WADA have known about this for a long time. It means nothing.


24 posted on 09/16/2010 8:52:05 AM PDT by green iguana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: carton253
"Hearsay"

It would not be allowed to be entered as direct evidence at trial because of the hearsay rule, BUT it could be used to impeach the declarant should the declarant be called to testify and then say something different than what is on that tape.

Also, the hearsay rule does not apply in a grand jury. It's completely admissible there, and may be weighed as evidence by the jurors.

25 posted on 09/16/2010 8:53:01 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: G Larry
"Dr./Patient privilege! "

Is what Armstrong waived when he had a conversation with his doctor in front of his friends.

Let that be a lesson, confidentially is waived when you say something to a doctor/lawyer/priest in the presence of other non-privileged parties (generally).

26 posted on 09/16/2010 8:55:08 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

uh hearsay
setup
they’re gonna have to do better than that


27 posted on 09/16/2010 8:55:49 AM PDT by yldstrk (My heros have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Somehow I just don’t care.


28 posted on 09/16/2010 8:56:50 AM PDT by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robbin
"Sounds like a major HIPPA violation."

No, the "friend" is under no HIPAA limitation. HIPAA applies to medical practioners, hospitals, insurance companies, and the government - not to friends.

If you have a conversation with your doctor about your medical problems, and your friends are present, you're waiving doctor/patient confidentiality - which means the doctor could theoretically be forced to testify about what was discussed when those friends were present. BUT, the doctor is still bound by HIPAA - IOW he couldn't talk about it unless he was subpoenaed. The friends are bound by nothing. The 1A gives them license to repeat virtually any conversation they heard.

29 posted on 09/16/2010 8:59:37 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Under the Blago Rule he can just say he was talking crap...


30 posted on 09/16/2010 9:02:53 AM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

I remember some controversey in the late 90’s about some drugs he used during his legitimate cancer tx that would be considered performance enhancing today if used in that context. I think this is old info that is being newly spun out of context.


31 posted on 09/16/2010 9:03:39 AM PDT by mdmathis6 (Mike Mathis is my name,opinions are my own,subject to flaming when deserved!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote

Yes. I’ve been watching video from the freestyle wrestling world championships, I’m not even sure what drug you could accuse them of using. Hard to say steroids since none look roided up at all.


32 posted on 09/16/2010 9:06:32 AM PDT by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6
"I remember some controversey in the late 90’s about some drugs he used during his legitimate cancer tx that would be considered performance enhancing today if used in that context."

EPO is sometimes prescribed to people who undergoing chemotherapy. EPO is also a drug of choice for endurance athletes because it increases red blood cell count. It was probably that one.

33 posted on 09/16/2010 9:07:17 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6

The bigger controversy seems to be the lengths LeMond will go to to bring down Armstrong.

Talk about obsessive.


34 posted on 09/16/2010 9:07:57 AM PDT by LadyBuck (In the immortal words of Jean Paul Sartre, 'Au revoir, gopher')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: LadyBuck

Seems to be true of all great men...Paul had his ‘thorn in the flesh’....Prometheus, his liver ate daily by a vulture....Samson had his Delilah...even the Roman generals marching in triumph into the city had a man whispering into his ear”glory is fleeting...all glory is fleeting”.

Armstrong seems to have a LeMond stuck like a snake onto his heel!


35 posted on 09/16/2010 9:13:55 AM PDT by mdmathis6 (Mike Mathis is my name,opinions are my own,subject to flaming when deserved!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

I’m sick of all this nonsense. Jealousy, stupidity, and third hand testimony from unreliable sources. Lance Armstrong was a great competitor, an admirable man. Greg LeMond is a jerk.


36 posted on 09/16/2010 9:24:32 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kimmers
"Greg LeMond needs some counseling to get over all this....he just won't let this go and the world will remember him a whiner/nut case and not a champion cyclist..... "

Too bad. LeMond was a great cyclist too and it makes me wonder what his grudge against Armstrong is...

37 posted on 09/16/2010 9:29:19 AM PDT by Mariner (USS Tarawa, VQ3, USS Benjamin Stoddert, NAVCAMS WestPac, 7th Fleet, Navcommsta Puget Sound)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

Yes, although if she told the truth to LeMond about the conversation, she LIED to LeMond about telling the truth in a deposition.

So we KNOW she lied to LeMond, the question is did she ALSO lie to the courts where she could be prosecuted.


38 posted on 09/16/2010 9:30:25 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Mention Greg LeMond and you know which end of the horse it’s coming from.


39 posted on 09/16/2010 9:33:34 AM PDT by A Strict Constructionist (Oligarchy...never vote for the Ivy League candidate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Armstrong cannot compete in France because the last time he was there, he was caught with 3 illegal substances: shampoo, deodorant, and toothpaste.


40 posted on 09/16/2010 9:34:35 AM PDT by RAV_USA (RAV_USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

“it makes me wonder what his grudge against Armstrong is...”

Start with the beer and Radio Shack adds and work back...pure unadulterated jealousy IMHO.


41 posted on 09/16/2010 9:37:27 AM PDT by A Strict Constructionist (Oligarchy...never vote for the Ivy League candidate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Even if someone could produce a tape of the actual conversation, and on that tape Lance Armstrong could be heard telling his doctors that he used performance enhancing drugs, I’m not sure this would have any legal effect, because Lance Armstrong could now say that he was lying to the doctors at that time.


42 posted on 09/16/2010 9:40:27 AM PDT by Texan Tory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paine in the Neck
Armstrong is the White Whale to Lemond’s Ahab. It’s been driving Greg insane for years.

It's gone well beyond Ahab stage. It's jihad. What kind of a crackpot spends time doing PI work and taping unsuspecting people?

43 posted on 09/16/2010 10:00:04 AM PDT by qwertypie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Armstrong has been tested more than any other cyclist.

Are the tests incomplete?
How could he keep coming up clean.?


44 posted on 09/16/2010 10:12:47 AM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cherry

Why should it fit?


45 posted on 09/16/2010 12:00:06 PM PDT by carton253 (Ask me about The Stainless Banner - a free e-zine dedicated to the armies of the Confederacy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
I thought second-hand or hearsay testimony was inadmissible in court.
46 posted on 09/16/2010 12:06:43 PM PDT by Ciexyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
Since the tape was made in 2004,

Maybe, maybe not. From the article:

"According to LeMond's wife Kathy, the tape was made in July 2004."

47 posted on 09/16/2010 4:28:21 PM PDT by SeeSac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeeSac

Well, you’d think that LeMond’s wife would know when the tape was made, and further if she was lying, she’d do so in a way that supported her husband, not (as this does) makes his claims more dubious.


48 posted on 09/16/2010 4:35:17 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

You are of course correct, if I had thought about it, I would have known. Thanks for correcting me.


49 posted on 09/16/2010 6:09:33 PM PDT by Robbin (If Sarah isn’t welcome, I’m not welcome, it’s just that simple…)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Whatever his grudge is, it is making LeMond look bad....


50 posted on 09/17/2010 7:42:27 AM PDT by Kimmers (Tell a lie often enough it becomes political........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson