Three stories on tap for tonight, all of them fairly short.
Steroid Dealers Busted in Florida
Yetersday, The Tampa Tribune reported that Richard and Sandra Thomas of Lakeland, Florida were arrested the day before and have been charged with multiple counts of “possession of anabolic steroids with intention to sell and deliver” and a number of other charges. The paper’s story contains one of the more interesting quotes I’ve seen in a while:
[Polk County Sheriff Grady] Judd said far from being uncooperative, Thomas openly bragged about selling steroids, though he wouldn’t name names.
“I can tell you this, there will be a whole lot of people puckered up after the morning news,'” Judd said.
The sheriff said when Thomas was asked whether he had sold steroids to professional athletes, he replied, “You name the sport, and I’ve sold steroids to athletes who play it.”
Puckered up? How about lawyered up, too? And does Thomas really mean every sport? Any jai-alai players on his client list? Curlers? (not for the hair…) Lugers? (Luge, the sport, not Luger, the gun. And also not Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana.) As The New York Times reported today:
“We asked him who he was buying from and he said he was the biggest dealer in Florida and was buying stuff from many different countries abroad,” Sheriff Grady Judd of Polk County said in a telephone interview.
Judd said that he had his officers ask Thomas if he sold steroids to professional athletes because he expected members of the news media to ask about that.
“That’s when he said that he sold to the Nationals and Capitals; at that point we didn’t push him, and we don’t know any more,” Judd said.
According to a number of reports, the two teams are “looking into” the statements Thomas made. We’ll see what happens next. Should be interesting.
Meanwhile, a Certain Someone Gets a Huge Chunk of Change
(Hat tip to strbuk, who pointed me in the direction of this story yesterday.) According to MLB.com:
Major League Baseball’s commitment to fighting the use of performance-enhancing drugs continues to pay dividends.
Just ask J. Thomas Brenna, Ph.D., of Cornell University, who won the first anti-doping research grant awarded by the Partnership for Clean Competition (PCC) since MLB helped spearhead the research collaborative in 2008.
For those who followed the Floyd Landis case, Brenna’s name should be familiar. He was one of the expert witnesses who testified against the 2006 Tour de France winner during the anti-doping arbitration hearings held at Pepperdine University in May 2007. The article goes on to say that Brenna’s research proves that efforts to detect the use of performance-enhancing drugs like steroids is working, saying:
Brenna breaks ground with new techniques that should allow easier detection of synthetic and “designer” steroids in urine and Brenna also plans to work with carbon isotope ratio (CIR) testing to determine if steroids are natural or synthetic.
“The PCC [Partnership for Clean Competition] is encouraged by Brenna’s research proposal and believes it is a very appropriate first grant for the PCC,” USOC acting chief executive officer and PCC board of governors chairperson Stephanie Streeter said.
“Brenna’s research project has the potential for increasing the sample throughput and detection limits, which would benefit all sports entities and improve upon existing testing techniques. We are impressed by Brenna’s research and look forward to his findings and recommendations over the next several years.”
A press release also on the MLB.com site adds this tidbit:
“The approach proposed by Brenna shifts targeted identification requirements to a non-targeted analysis of all urinary steroid,” [US Anti-Doping Agency Chief Science Officer Larry] Bowers said. “The technique hopefully will enable the detection of previously uncharacterized or unknown designer steroids in urine. In addition, this technique has the potential to broaden CIR testing.”
One can only hope that Brenna’s techniques will be fully vetted before they become institutionalized. But then again, hope springs eternal.
Strange Goings On in France
In a comment earlier today, Jean C provided an English-language translation of the this Le Monde article. Here’s the first part of the translation Jean provides:
French justice awaits Floyd Landis
Tuesday May 5, Floyd Landis and his coach, Arnie Baker, have not submitted to the Central Directorate Judicial Police (DCPJ). The winner will forfeit the 2006 Tour de France and his mentor, however, were summoned to be heard at 11H within the investigation conducted by the court of Nanterre, Thomas Cassuto on the hacking of the anti-doping laboratory of Chatenay-Malabry (Hauts -de-Seine).
You can see the rest, along with a subsequent comment by Jeff, here. From my perspective, it seems like quite a stretch to believe that Arnie Baker was involved in the hacking into (or as Jeff points out, a possible leak of information from) France’s national anti-doping laboratory. One question I have regarding the story is why French officials couldn’t take a deposition from Baker in California, instead of summoning him to appear in France. Or, for that matter, why they couldn’t hook up a conference call, as was done during one of Landis’ arbitration hearings for a witness who couldn’t make it to the actual hearing site. What’s the necessity of bringing Baker, Landis or both to the French court?
The story goes on to note that Pierre Bordry, president of France’s anti-doping agency would not hesitate to seek an international arrest warrant to force Landis and Baker to testify. Somehow, I don’t see either one voluntarily traveling to France for this matter. If Bordry follows through on his threat to seek the arrest warrants, Landis and Baker will need to be cautious about their foreign travel. Which, coincidentally, would keep Landis from competing at certain European races in the future — should he sign with a UCI ProTour team, that is. Hmm. French justice. There just may be a method to some of this madness…
Update: A few hours after this article was posted, Mark Zeigler of the San Diego Union Tribune posted an article (with quotes from a couple of the usual suspects) about Baker and his alleged ties to the hacking of LNDD in late 2006. (Thanks again to strbuk, who forwarded the link to me.)
“If it’s true,” USADA CEO Travis Tygart said of the hacking allegations, “as disturbing as it is, it’s not surprising, because their whole strategy was using every means possible to escape the consequence of Floyd’s doping, including attempting to scare witnesses and trying to take down those simply trying to do their jobs for clean sport.”
Classic.
As Thomas points it in the precedent subject , it’s an old story that Baker was alleged linked with that story: just few times after LNDD hacking it was reported that there was a link between Baker and Mr Crepin.
Just story come back in April : see comments of Spring Tempest http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=1395
We can have a few questions about what has done police for around a 2 years period:
Did they try to contact Mr. Baker? Apparently, they did 2 times officially since mars by convocation.
I think there is 2 major possibilites
Earlier they had send unformal invitation as witness but they got no response.
or they want to catch him on french soil probably for a such case they cannot catch him on USA soil.
Jean,
True that there have been reports from some time back that made that allegation. I’m not sure what you mean by “convocation”. Would that be a teleconference, or something similar?
I don’t know what the quality of the evidence they have is, but from Mark Zeigler’s article (in the update, above) it sounds a bit tenuous. Anyone can insert any name they want as the author or editor to a Word file or other document. Especially someone who’s capable of hacking into a lab’s network and tracking down the embarrassing documents. I wouldn’t put much stock in that. Tracing the IP address might be possible, but given that many (if not most) people’s connections are via dynamic addresses (basically the ISP assigns your address each time you connect to the Internet, and it might not be the same from one time to the next), it would take quite a bit of detective work to pin an IP address on a particular individual at a particular time. Not impossible, perhaps, but not all that easy, either. IP address forgeries, another thing that hackers can do pretty easily, could also be at play.
So far, it seems pretty sketchy to me.
Wow, Tygart just doesn’t miss an opportunity to bad-mouth Floyd, does he?
tom
I guess I have to ask: what is an “international arrest warrant?” Baker’s questions cited in the CN article are kind of interesting:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2009/may09/may29news2
Travis Tygart (Travesty Tygart), an attorney previously employed as “in house” counsel for USADA, had the opportunity to address the issue of the “hacked” (possibly leaked?) documents at the hearing in Malibu, through the expensive attorney team he hired to prosecute the Landis case for USADA (YOUR TAX DOLLARS AND RACE LICENSE FEES AT WORK), in lieu of “in house counsel” such as himself.
The accuracy of the content of the “hacked” documents was never disputed at the Malibu hearing. The content (serial listing of LNDD testing and reporting screw-ups) was accepted as factual, but played an insignificant part in the hearing.
Regardless of whether the documents were hacked or leaked (leaked documents wouldn’t be surprising for this particular lab with a long, storied, and well documented history of leaking confidential information), the fact that the information got out is a testament to the lax standards in multiple areas of this lab’s operations. That Tygart and Bordry are now separately making a big deal about it smacks of politics. If they were truly concerned, they had a ample chance to address the issue with Arnie Baker and Floyd Landis during the Malibu hearing or CAS appeal in NYC.
It’s bombast and BS. I doubt either Arnie or Floyd will be appearing in France on the matter. When Floyd appeared in France (seconfd bite of the apple and an act of dis-unifying the WADA code by the French Federation) and pledged not to race on French soil from a certain date to a certain date, that didn’t work out too well for him. The CAS arbs took that as an opportunity to spin that into an absurdly illogical starting point for his suspension, once the CAS appeal (kangaroo court/star chamber, cough…assholes) was denied.
Bordry is nothing if not theatric. Seems his skills are more attuned toward an acting career than a lab administrator, unless quantumly f&%ked up lab is what you are going for….
“If it’s true,” USADA CEO Travis Tygart said of the hacking allegations, “as disturbing as it is, it’s not surprising, because their whole strategy was using every means possible to escape the consequence of Floyd’s doping, including attempting to scare witnesses and trying to take down those simply trying to do their jobs for clean sport.”
“If it’s true”
Probably not.
“their whole strategy was using every means possible to escape the consequence of Floyd’s doping”
While Floyd was sanctioned for doping though a “trumped up” process that included the USADA hearing in Malibu and CAS appeal in NCY, neither produced convincing evidence of doping, as reported from knowledgeable and reasonably neutral observers much less those of us who hold tings like the concepts of due process, impartial judges, proper CoC, complete documentation, repeatable results, and knowing how to maintain/operate critical testing instruments as being important. I’d say Floyd’s side was appropriately diligent, considering he faced what many have described as a “kangaroo court” and Judge Bill Hue likens to a “star chamber”. Both acknowledge the “fix’ was in and the outcome predetermined by the side that acted as prosecutor.
“attempting to scare witnesses”
A bad act made by a friend of Floyd upon a person who should not have been called as a witness by the USADA side in the first place because he had no personal knowledge of the facts of the case. His presence was meant to inflame and it achieved that goal, however the “witness” refused to respond on cross and his testimony was deemed worthless by the arbs.
trying to take down those simply trying to do their jobs for clean sport.”
“Trying” might be the operative word here. Incompetence often short circuits effort. If we buy into the argument that the lab techs at LNDD were trying, then their efforts were cancelled out because of fatal flaws and general incompetence. Seems their skills and practices were not actually “fit for purpose”. Except in WADA World – an alternate universe where things are what WADA says it is.
Tygart should prepare to duck because Karma is getting ready to bi*#h slap him.
Thanks for the link Rant!
“But French authorities became suspicious when one of the recipients of the stolen documents, Montreal anti-doping lab director Christiane Ayotte, conducted a history search on the file – a copy of which she provided to the Union-Tribune. The previous user is listed as “Arnie.” “
1) Yes, sophisticated hackers often list their own first names as document user names. (sarcasm)
2) Actually much more likely it’s a trivial hacker inspired joke.
3) Are the French authorities that unsophisticated or just stupid?
4) In a sense, Arnie Baker has been implicated because Madame Ayotte says so………
“To say the lab is not good, that the lab is sloppy, that the lab makes mistakes, we’re used to hearing that,” said Montreal’s Ayotte, who testified on behalf on the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency in Landis’ arbitration hearings. “But if this is true, that type of spying, it’s something that gets a bit disgusting.”
1) It’s good to hear that Madame Ayotte has gotten used to hearing the truth, with the truth being that sloppy, sloppy lab (LNDD) made many, many mistakes.
2) The lab is not good. It is quite bad.
3) To accuse Arnie Baker, at this point and with not much more than innuendo, is disgusting.
4) Idiots with a pointy stick.
Jeff,
I think you have to keep a real balance on the facts and you should follow your 2 points
3) To accuse others, at this point and with not much more than innuendo, is disgusting.
4) Idiots with a pointy stick.
I don’t want to hurt anyone, especially Floyd who has enough suffered of the consequence of his fault, here because we can speak on facts with respect and honesty, but I am a bit tired by your insane attacks on everyone who don’t stick to your dreams.
About the Will’s episode you should recall that some damaging posts were written on a forum during the “wiki defense”, and , it’s not stupid to see a correlation with what happened later.
———
To be back on the San Diego article, I think Ziegler missed the point that is the IP adress that is the first point , the word file could be a damaging piece too because some versions and by configuration a history of the change done in a document are saved within the document.
In french article it’s only mentionned that Baker could have ordered the hack, or at least benefit from it, the hackers could chose their target linked to actuality and then propose their findings to the potential buyers.
I have speak with an IT enginner of networks, and about the IP adress, he said that IP can be forgered but the computer which send the forgered email adress should have false identification too, so in that case it’s simple to identify that is a forgery even if it’s not possible to find the real sender.
Who and why someone would have used Baker’s IP adress? Difficult to see the LNDD sending false emails from USA soils.
In France internet providers have to keep a record of IP adress used by lines, even for dynamic IP. With the 7.11 I doubt that should be different in USA.
It’s possible to send anonymous mail by using REAL (some aren’t the IP adress of sender is added) anonymous mailer http://www.google.com/search?q=anonymous mailer
but in that case the adress IP of the sender would never been Baker’s.
I know you guys don’t want to hear this…..
But Tygart hit the nail on the head.
These allegations are credible precisely because they correspond to the past actions and overall strategy of the Landis team.
Jean C,
Unless you stoop to targeting minors or those who might be susceptible due to disability, then don’t worry about hurting anyone via the interweb. You just don’t have that affect.
If keeping a real balance on the facts, then we know that Floyd was sanctioned as a result of the Malibu hearing only because two out of the three arbitrators were anxiously satisfied with USADA’a theatrics.
I’m somewhat puzzled as to why Bordry is seeking the spotlight about old, and previously un-addressed, hacker news? It seems to again highlight his lab’s many shortcomings and to remind us of how close those bad acts came to setting Floyd free (as he should have been), even as he faced a kangaroo court or star chamber. (re-read the majority arb’s admonition concerning sub-par lab work) Good god man, Madame Ayotte even reminds us about the crappy work she was obligated to public ally support.
There are hundreds of ways to falsify the identities of intenet users. The French authorities and Bordry have not communicated to the press that they have ruled any of them out. FWIW, I’m highly skeptical they have traced an IP address to Baker. It’s much more likely a bluff.
In case you need it spelled out for you, didn’t put two and two together, or didn’t follow the “clues”, it’s more than possible the information was leaked by a whistle blower from LNDD.
Ludwig,
Tygart often acts as a political slut. He says what gets him press and forwards his career. Colbert calls some of what Tygart engages in, “truthiness”.
FWIW, the overall strategy for Floyd’s side was to put all the cards on the table for anyone to see. The USADA/alphabet soup side sought to, and successfully kept key evidence/information from the public. Which overall strategy was an example of taking the higher ground?
Will…I mean “Jeff”…enough. Does your sordid little crew possess one shred of honor?
Hey Jeff,
Was it that “the “witness” refused to respond on cross and his testimony was deemed worthless by the arbs” or that, like Suh who fired him on the spot, they just felt that he was worthless. Didn’t he and Floyd also post threats on a public Internet forum?
Speaking about intelligent stunts, are you sure that Arnie is smart enough not to post his own name? Remember that ‘worthless testimony’? How did that brainchild even get identified in the court in the first place?
Didn’t he make an obscene, threatening call to a witness while pretending to be that witness’s uncle? Didn’t he do that:
1. With his personal cellphone
2. Without blocking the number
Jeff, could you tell us how easy it was to be identified in the court room the next day holding that very same cell phone with that very same number? That sure looked stupid. Did it feel stupid? Of course, he was supposed to be the brains of the outfit, now wasn’t he?
With an example like that, it is pretty easy to believe that someone with barely half the intellect might actually sign ‘Arnie’. I mean, you seem like an intelligent guy – or at least a guy that thinks they are intelligent. Someone who would never be so stupid as to make a call like that without at least blocking the number. How hard do you think it would be to believe this given the company Arnie was keeping?
Oh, wait, now you are going to tell us it was the alcohol. Same alcohol that caused the Testosterone spike in Stage 17? Not like we haven’t tried that before. Do you think that Floyd, Will and Arnie are still passing the bottle, or is it ‘spin’ the bottle?
Joah,
I can vouch that Jeff is not Will.
Everyone,
There’s an aspect to this story that hasn’t been reported, though, for the life of me, I don’t know why. It’s the subject of an upcoming post, and I suspect will add a new dimension to the discussion of the documents sent out in the fall of 2006.
Josh and Dave,
Much like the whole WADA World system, you seem to be willing, or even anxious, to assume for fact that which cannot be validated. In this case, you’ve assumed I am Will, and you are quite wrong. But hey, thanks for playing.
Rant is correct. He knows who I am. My name is Jeff (real name). I am acquainted with Floyd, but don’t personally know him nearly well enough to be called a friend. Some mistake my motivation to post on the subject as some sort of hero worship. I actually abhor the concepts of hero worship, role models, and the like. Those that buy into those kinds of concepts are begging for a fall. The human condition is just too fragile for any of us to live up to such lofty expectations. My best advise is to identify the various positive attributes of people you might admire and to try to incorporate the ones that fit into your daily life. My motivation is to speak out, in whatever way I can, about a flawed system that treats athletes as chattel and is meant, primarily, to protect the monetary value of the olympic brand, while masquerading as something much more noble.
I’m not going to defend Will’s interaction with LeMond in Malibu. It was wrong and indefensible. The last I heard was that Will was seeking professional help. I hope he got help, made appropriate apologies to LeMond, and has become a socially more responsible person as a result.
With that said, I’m surprised others defend the actions of LeMond that led him to the hearing in Malibu and/or his involvement at the hearing. He had zero personal relevant knowledge to add to the hearing. He first pressed his way into the issue by pretending he wanted to be helpful to Floyd. Early on, LeMond assumed guilt with insufficient facts to form such a judgment. Given LeMond’s tactics and the fact that he wasn’t ever exactly on Floyd’s side, I’m not surprised LeMond’s intrusion was unwelcome. LeMond also refused to answer legitimate questions on cross (questions allowed by the arbs), at the hearing. In court, or in this case – an arbitration hearing, you don’t get to choose the questions you will answer on cross, if you expect the testimony offered on direct to be considered. By refusing to answer legitimate questions on cross LeMond nullified his own testimony on direct. That’s just how it goes, saint or not.
I’ve only met Arnie Baker once. Judging by some posts I’ve seen on another forum, some seem to think him to be creepy and/or unintelligent because of his physical appearance, and perhaps because he wears large thick glasses. Might Josh or Dave be among those people? Regardless, you were dead wrong in making the assumption that I am Will. Given that, I’m guessing those making assumptions about the content of a person’s character based upon their physical appearance might yield similarly wrong results. In my limited experience, I found Arnie Baker to be polite, intelligent, and an able communicator. I would guess he is well educated and has earned advanced degrees.
Josh and Dave, if you have the stones, you are free to transmit your apologies and set the record straight that I’m not Will in your little corner of the intarwebz. Now run along you knuckleheads.
I’ll leave it at that for now and look forward Rant’s upcoming thread.
Where are our legal experts? As far as I know, if a US citizen located in US territory is wanted by the authorities of a foreign country, those authorities have to go thru the process of extradition, assuming there is an extradition treaty in existence between the 2 countries and the crime is covered by it. Some countries, Canada for one, will not extradite a person to the US for a capital offense, unless the authorities in the US are willing to take the death penalty off the table. So if the French authorities are actually prepared to arrest Baker and/or Landis, they will have to present enough evidence in the US justice system, with all the rules pertaining thereto, to convince a judge there is good reason to extradite. If they just want to have him come for questioning, I don’t see how they could compel Baker or Landis to come. And I have never heard of an “international arrest warrant”. If a gendarme showed up at my door with one, I’d probably tell him to take a hike. Now, I am no legal expert and maybe I am wrong in part or in whole, but if I was Baker or Landis, I would not go to France unless proper US authorities ruled I had too.
From what I have seen here and the articles linked above, I find the evidence against Baker to be rather slim. But then perhaps the authorities are holding their cards close to their collective vests.
Since I don’t know Dr. Baker personally, I don’t have any idea if he has both the technical expertise and the lack of moral turpitude to do something like this.
I’ve met and spoken with Baker once, and he is a class act. What may come across as creepy to some is more ‘bookish’ to me. He’s an earnest character, and honestly, his protege has been destroyed by actions outside of both their control. I believe that Arnie was more involved in the CAS hearing than in the USADA case, but either way, we won’t be changing anyone’s opinions. Those lines were drawn years ago.
Floyd’s riding well, playing his role of support for OUCH, and Arnie is busy with that team and several other individuals. As a coach, he has my utmost respect and admiration, dare I say Hero worship, since he was a pioneer in dedicating himself to bike coaching at a time when this sport was in its’ metaphorical infancy in the US. His decision to not respond to these allegations must be respected on its’ own. It’s not the way I would reply, but then again, I’ve never had an athlete with that level of talent or determination. Arnie’s had several.
But once again, everyone is throwing doubt to the wind and convicting this man in the eye of public opinion and innuendo before hearing any of the facts. How typical from the haters. Heaven help you if anything similar were to ever happen to you. No one would hear your screams from the pit they’d throw you in.
Baker does NOT have the expertise to pull this off. He did NOT get outside help. And Jean, or any of you other ricks with a p who want to cast allegations about with no proof… Why don’t you just CALL him or EMAIL him with your questions before he lawyer’s up? What’s it going to hurt? Then with any answers you get, think about how you’d respond if it were you.
Leave Baker and Landis alone. You’ve hurt them beyond repair. You’re the evil mob with the pitchfork, looking for the witch. Good luck, you’ll have more success hunting snipe.
My apologies runner guy. I eagerly await more of that Rant brand logic.
Danica Patrick*
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=7730178
I particularly like the part where searches for this AP story turn up the “if you ain’t cheatin’ you ain’t tryin'” quotes from the race car drivers, along with the ads of Danica both demanding respect *and* posing in a bikini on cars for pay. Like the story goes, “we know what you are – that has been established. Now we’re just hagglin’ price.”
Tygart should certainly have personal knowledge about making irresponsible comments. Whatever Patrick believes, she ended up advocating the more politically correct line. I’ll give some credit to Patrick. One notable difference between Tygart and Patrick is that Patrick knows when she’s made an irresponsible comment and corrects the action. Tygart seems to lack that filter and corrective mechanism.
I’d also give Patrick some slack about the “modeling” stuff. It’s been established she can race a car with the best in her league. Given she’s good at her core business, then I can’t find much fault with her for providing a few of us with some good clean entertainment derived from her modeling gigs. FWIW eightzero, I can’t fathom her modeling being equated to prostitution, unless you pay outrageous prices for internet access or magazines and are easily aroused?
Performance enhancement for race car drivers is going to be fairly limited due to the nature of the exercise. It’s also going to be different for various race series and individual competitors. For one driver it might be a weight loss product, while another might want to build muscle mass. For example, A F1 car is better matched with a jockey sized driver (pilot). At the same time, a jockey sized driver would not be the best fit for Nascar’s top series where someone with the girth of Tony Stewart does just fine. In the end, unless the car demands an overly narrow set of physical attributes in order to be raced effectively, it will boil down mostly to skill if the equipment is reasonably comparable. (with race cars, $ can = speed. Is $ a ped for race cars?)
Nascar banned one driver for using, and racing under the influence of heroin. It’s kind of easy to imagine his fellow drivers not wanting to be on the same race track and to also imagine their distaste for realizing now that they were at one time.
Again, I’m no fan boy of anyone and am particularly ambivalent about Jeremy Mayfield, but it’s possible Nascar got it wrong in suspending him. Mayfield suffers from ADD and is approved for a prescription drug to control the condition. Nascar’s testing may have confused the combination of his prescription drug and an over the counter allergy medication for something on their banned list? That’s a maybe, however, more information should become available in the near future to make a better determination.
The problem is that if a mistake has been made, Nascar has already taken a stand and it will be hard for the organization to back down. Meanwhile, legal action has taken place and both sides have lawyered up. That just compounds the problem of correcting a potential mistake (if a mistake occurred) as the stakes have become much higher for both sides. Nascar holds the highest hand regardless, so it’s probably going to take a big gun to get them to change course, even if they are in the wrong. Sound familiar???
Josh offered a subdued apology for his incorrect assumption. Thanks.
Dave has been tardy, or perhaps he can’t summon up the manhood? If Dave is DLRay (I don’t know for sure) and he manages to locate his manhood, then he can also make a retraction and set the record straight with his felllow trolls over at DPF.
Where are you Dave??? Hit and run like a little girl??? (use SNL Sprokets voice for proper effect)
Just to remind you of your bs:
Dave
May 31st, 2009 at 12:22 am
“Hey Jeff,
Was it that “the “witness” refused to respond on cross and his testimony was deemed worthless by the arbs” or that, like Suh who fired him on the spot, they just felt that he was worthless. Didn’t he and Floyd also post threats on a public Internet forum?
Speaking about intelligent stunts, are you sure that Arnie is smart enough not to post his own name? Remember that ‘worthless testimony’? How did that brainchild even get identified in the court in the first place?
Didn’t he make an obscene, threatening call to a witness while pretending to be that witness’s uncle? Didn’t he do that:
1. With his personal cellphone
2. Without blocking the number
Jeff, could you tell us how easy it was to be identified in the court room the next day holding that very same cell phone with that very same number? That sure looked stupid. Did it feel stupid? Of course, he was supposed to be the brains of the outfit, now wasn’t he?
With an example like that, it is pretty easy to believe that someone with barely half the intellect might actually sign ‘Arnie’. I mean, you seem like an intelligent guy – or at least a guy that thinks they are intelligent. Someone who would never be so stupid as to make a call like that without at least blocking the number. How hard do you think it would be to believe this given the company Arnie was keeping?
Oh, wait, now you are going to tell us it was the alcohol. Same alcohol that caused the Testosterone spike in Stage 17? Not like we haven’t tried that before. Do you think that Floyd, Will and Arnie are still passing the bottle, or is it ’spin’ the bottle?”