Armstrong Cancels Sao Paulo Trip

[BL[_2_]]

Personal reasons. Target letter?

http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601

[BL[_2_]]

On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:
> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>
> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.

[Brad Anders]

On Oct 12, 7:28*am, BL > wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>
> >http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>
> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.

He was here in Phoenix last weekend, doing a local tri. According to
my friends who raced with him, he was not in handcuffs.

[BL[_2_]]

On 10/12/2011 10:46 AM, Brad Anders wrote:
> On Oct 12, 7:28 am, > wrote:
>> On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>
>>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>>
>> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.
>
> He was here in Phoenix last weekend, doing a local tri. According to
> my friends who raced with him, he was not in handcuffs.
No ****. What does that have to do with canceling his trip and the
reason? Answer--Nothing. Back into your hole, Brad

[Brad Anders]

On Oct 12, 7:53*am, BL > wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 10:46 AM, Brad Anders wrote:> On Oct 12, 7:28 am, > *wrote:
> >> On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:> *Personal reasons. Target letter?
>
> >>>http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>
> >> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.
>
> > He was here in Phoenix last weekend, doing a local tri. According to
> > my friends who raced with him, he was not in handcuffs.
>
> No ****. What does that have to do with canceling his trip and the
> reason? Answer--Nothing. *Back into your hole, Brad

Hey, I'm not the one responding to my own post with more wild-ass
conjectures, Brian. At least my post is based in fact.

[Fredmaster of Brainerd]

On Oct 12, 7:28*am, BL > wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>
> >http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>
> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.

No. Sheesh. He read this article yesterday (LANCE reads
the NY Times every day):

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/movies/elizabeth-olsen-in-martha-marcy-may-marlene.html

and realized he had some unfinished business in the States.

Fredmaster Ben

[BL[_2_]]

On 10/12/2011 11:26 AM, Brad Anders wrote:
> On Oct 12, 7:53 am, > wrote:
>> On 10/12/2011 10:46 AM, Brad Anders wrote:> On Oct 12, 7:28 am, > wrote:
>>>> On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>
>>>>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>>
>>>> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.
>>
>>> He was here in Phoenix last weekend, doing a local tri. According to
>>> my friends who raced with him, he was not in handcuffs.
>>
>> No ****. What does that have to do with canceling his trip and the
>> reason? Answer--Nothing. Back into your hole, Brad
>
> Hey, I'm not the one responding to my own post with more wild-ass
> conjectures, Brian. At least my post is based in fact.
Wild ass conjecture?? Now that's amusing, Brad.

[atriage[_6_]]

On 12/10/2011 15:24, BL wrote:
> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>
> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601

What did Lance ever do to you to make you such an obsesso? Let me guess, you
came home early from your gruelling 2 mile training ride and found your
boyfriend giving Lance a sloppy blow job...yes I can see that would be quite
annoying.

--

[atriage[_6_]]

On 12/10/2011 15:46, Brad Anders wrote:
> On Oct 12, 7:28 am, > wrote:
>> On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>
>>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>>
>> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.
>
> He was here in Phoenix last weekend, doing a local tri. According to
> my friends who raced with him, he was not in handcuffs.

Would have made the swim kind of tricky if he had been.

--

[Jimmy July[_3_]]

On 10/12/2011 7:28 AM, BL wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:
>> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>
>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.

Possibly kidnapped by Anton Berlin for use as a sex toy.

The evidence in favor of mine is better than the evidence in favor of
yours in that we've actually seen that evidence.

[BL[_2_]]

On 10/12/2011 4:36 PM, atriage wrote:
> On 12/10/2011 15:24, BL wrote:
>> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>
>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>
> What did Lance ever do to you to make you such an obsesso? Let me guess,
> you came home early from your gruelling 2 mile training ride and found
> your boyfriend giving Lance a sloppy blow job...yes I can see that would
> be quite annoying.
>
LOL!!!

[Scott]

On Oct 12, 8:24*am, BL > wrote:
> Personal reasons. *Target letter?
>
> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601

So?

[Mark J.]

On 10/12/2011 1:37 PM, atriage wrote:
> On 12/10/2011 15:46, Brad Anders wrote:
>> On Oct 12, 7:28 am, > wrote:
>>> On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>>
>>>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>>>
>>> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.
>>
>> He was here in Phoenix last weekend, doing a local tri. According to
>> my friends who raced with him, he was not in handcuffs.
>
> Would have made the swim kind of tricky if he had been.

It was never a problem for Jack LaLanne.

Mark J.

[Simply Fred]

Brad Anders wrote:
>> He was here in Phoenix last weekend, doing a local tri. According to
>> my friends who raced with him, he was not in handcuffs.

atriage wrote:
> Would have made the swim kind of tricky if he had been.

On the contrary that would make triathlons a lot more spectator
friendly, at least from an rbr spectators point of view. Not quite as
spectacular as adding sharks though.

[Simply Fred]

BL wrote:
>> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.

Jimmy July wrote:
> Possibly kidnapped by Anton Berlin for use as a sex toy.
>
> The evidence in favor of mine is better than the evidence in favor of
> yours in that we've actually seen that evidence.

I don't suppose Liz has also been rendited ?

[BL[_2_]]

On 10/12/2011 9:48 PM, Scott wrote:
> On Oct 12, 8:24 am, > wrote:
>> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>
>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>
> So?
Stay tuned over the coming 5 days. Elite cyclists are evidently buzzing
that the perp walks are imminent. Time will tell. LOL!!!!

[Brad Anders]

On Oct 13, 7:39*am, BL > wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 9:48 PM, Scott wrote:> On Oct 12, 8:24 am, > *wrote:
> >> Personal reasons. *Target letter?
>
> >>http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>
> > So?
>
> Stay tuned over the coming 5 days. *Elite cyclists are evidently buzzing
> that the perp walks are imminent. Time will tell. LOL!!!!

I guess it's fitting that 5 days from now is Tuesday.

[--D-y]

On Oct 13, 11:25*am, Brad Anders > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 7:39*am, BL > wrote:
>
> > On 10/12/2011 9:48 PM, Scott wrote:> On Oct 12, 8:24 am, > *wrote:
> > >> Personal reasons. *Target letter?
>
> > >>http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>
> > > So?
>
> > Stay tuned over the coming 5 days. *Elite cyclists are evidently buzzing
> > that the perp walks are imminent. Time will tell. LOL!!!!
>
> I guess it's fitting that 5 days from now is Tuesday.

Well, yeah, the same as ten years ago plus five days (nominal) is a
Tuesday, and ten years from now, plus five days, nominal, will be
another Tuesday.

BL abides.
--D-y

[atriage[_6_]]

On 13/10/2011 18:47, --D-y wrote:
> On Oct 13, 11:25 am, Brad > wrote:
>> On Oct 13, 7:39 am, > wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/12/2011 9:48 PM, Scott wrote:> On Oct 12, 8:24 am, > wrote:
>>>>> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>
>>>>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>>
>>>> So?
>>
>>> Stay tuned over the coming 5 days. Elite cyclists are evidently buzzing
>>> that the perp walks are imminent. Time will tell. LOL!!!!
>>
>> I guess it's fitting that 5 days from now is Tuesday.
>
> Well, yeah, the same as ten years ago plus five days (nominal) is a
> Tuesday, and ten years from now, plus five days, nominal, will be
> another Tuesday.
>
> BL abides.

and LA will more than likely still be walking around enjoying the fruits of his
ill-gotten gains...life's such a bitch, well for BL anyway.

--

[Frederick the Great]

In article >,
BL > wrote:

> On 10/12/2011 9:48 PM, Scott wrote:
> > On Oct 12, 8:24 am, > wrote:
> >> Personal reasons. Target letter?
> >>
> >> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
> >
> > So?
> Stay tuned over the coming 5 days. Elite cyclists are evidently buzzing
> that the perp walks are imminent. Time will tell. LOL!!!!

Self parody.
Yes, I can count.
Friday-Saturday-Sunday-Monday-Tuesday.

--
Old Fritz

[atriage[_6_]]

On 12/10/2011 15:46, Brad Anders wrote:
> On Oct 12, 7:28 am, > wrote:
>> On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>
>>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>>
>> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.
>
> He was here in Phoenix last weekend, doing a local tri. According to
> my friends who raced with him, he was not in handcuffs.

http://triathlon.competitor.com/2011/10/news/lance-armstrong-wins-arizonas-four-peaks-urban-dirt-triathlon_41728
--

[Scott]

On Oct 13, 8:39*am, BL > wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 9:48 PM, Scott wrote:> On Oct 12, 8:24 am, > *wrote:
> >> Personal reasons. *Target letter?
>
> >>http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>
> > So?
>
> Stay tuned over the coming 5 days. *Elite cyclists are evidently buzzing
> that the perp walks are imminent. Time will tell. LOL!!!!

When you LOL, is it an evil laugh, or just sort of a girlie giggle?

[RicodJour[_2_]]

On Oct 12, 1:17 pm, Fredmaster of Brainerd > wrote:
>
> No. Sheesh. He read this article yesterday (LANCE reads
> the NY Times every day):
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/movies/elizabeth-olsen-in-martha-ma...
> and realized he had some unfinished business in the States.

She was being interviewed on the tube yesterday and she's a-smoking!
I'd trade both twins for her. She's way finer. She looks more like
Scarlett Johansson's sister than an Olsen.

R

[Mike Jacoubowsky]

"BL" > wrote in message
...
> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>
> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601

I doubt there are many here who would find it surprising that he'd get
one. But it's kinda gone on a whole lot longer than anybody thought it
would. Or should I be including you as a subset of anybody? I mean
seriously, you've been posting about this eventuality for a very, very
long time, yet instead of ever suggesting that it's been frustrating
because it's been dragging out for so long, your posts continue to imply
"new & exciting!"

I think it's reasonable to assume that, here on RBR, people generally
believe that you thought a "target letter" would have come some time
ago. Interested in having a sincere dialog about that? Personally, not
that that matters, I would rather here your thoughts now, rather than
after the fact. Whatever the fact may end up being.

Thanks-

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

[Simply Fred]

Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/movies/elizabeth-olsen-in-martha-ma...
>> and realized he had some unfinished business in the States.

RicodJour wrote:
> She was being interviewed on the tube yesterday and she's a-smoking!
> I'd trade both twins for her. She's way finer. She looks more like
> Scarlett Johansson's sister than an Olsen.

The overriding criteria though is does she look like LANCE's mom ?

[Simply Fred]

Scott wrote:
> When you LOL, is it an evil laugh, or just sort of a girlie giggle?

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqs-LXdgt1o>

[BL[_2_]]

On 10/14/2011 2:19 AM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ...
>> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>
>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>
> I doubt there are many here who would find it surprising that he'd get
> one. But it's kinda gone on a whole lot longer than anybody thought it
> would. Or should I be including you as a subset of anybody? I mean
> seriously, you've been posting about this eventuality for a very, very
> long time, yet instead of ever suggesting that it's been frustrating
> because it's been dragging out for so long, your posts continue to imply
> "new& exciting!"

It is really not surprising that the investigation has taken this long.
It's a complex money and other evidence trail to follow.
>
> I think it's reasonable to assume that, here on RBR, people generally
> believe that you thought a "target letter" would have come some time
> ago. Interested in having a sincere dialog about that? Personally, not
> that that matters, I would rather here your thoughts now, rather than
> after the fact. Whatever the fact may end up being.

My impression from his attorney's actions is that Armstrong received a
target letter a while back. He may have been subpoenaed of late, but
the more I consider it, the wholesale cancellation of his Brazil trip
would not be caused by a subpoena that could be rescheduled. While my
criminal attorney friends think it un-likely that the US Attorney would
let him avoid the perp walk by giving him advance notice of an
indictment and arrest so he could quietly turn himself in, I think that
may be what has happened. Time will tell. :-)
>
> Thanks-
>
> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
>
>

[Mike Jacoubowsky]

> My impression from his attorney's actions is that Armstrong received a
> target letter a while back. He may have been subpoenaed of late, but
> the more I consider it, the wholesale cancellation of his Brazil trip
> would not be caused by a subpoena that could be rescheduled. While my
> criminal attorney friends think it un-likely that the US Attorney
> would let him avoid the perp walk by giving him advance notice of an
> indictment and arrest so he could quietly turn himself in, I think
> that may be what has happened. Time will tell. :-)

Is an arrest a requirement of being indicted? I'm sure that sounds like
a dumb question, but I never really thought about the idea before that
anyone who goes to trial was, by defintion, previously arrested for
something, that you couldn't be "charged" without having been
"arrested."

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


"BL" > wrote in message
...
> On 10/14/2011 2:19 AM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>>
>>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>>
>> I doubt there are many here who would find it surprising that he'd
>> get
>> one. But it's kinda gone on a whole lot longer than anybody thought
>> it
>> would. Or should I be including you as a subset of anybody? I mean
>> seriously, you've been posting about this eventuality for a very,
>> very
>> long time, yet instead of ever suggesting that it's been frustrating
>> because it's been dragging out for so long, your posts continue to
>> imply
>> "new& exciting!"
>
> It is really not surprising that the investigation has taken this
> long. It's a complex money and other evidence trail to follow.
>>
>> I think it's reasonable to assume that, here on RBR, people generally
>> believe that you thought a "target letter" would have come some time
>> ago. Interested in having a sincere dialog about that? Personally,
>> not
>> that that matters, I would rather here your thoughts now, rather than
>> after the fact. Whatever the fact may end up being.
>
> My impression from his attorney's actions is that Armstrong received a
> target letter a while back. He may have been subpoenaed of late, but
> the more I consider it, the wholesale cancellation of his Brazil trip
> would not be caused by a subpoena that could be rescheduled. While my
> criminal attorney friends think it un-likely that the US Attorney
> would let him avoid the perp walk by giving him advance notice of an
> indictment and arrest so he could quietly turn himself in, I think
> that may be what has happened. Time will tell. :-)
>>
>> Thanks-
>>
>> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
>> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
>>
>>
>

[BL[_2_]]

On 10/14/2011 1:42 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>> My impression from his attorney's actions is that Armstrong received a
>> target letter a while back. He may have been subpoenaed of late, but
>> the more I consider it, the wholesale cancellation of his Brazil trip
>> would not be caused by a subpoena that could be rescheduled. While my
>> criminal attorney friends think it un-likely that the US Attorney
>> would let him avoid the perp walk by giving him advance notice of an
>> indictment and arrest so he could quietly turn himself in, I think
>> that may be what has happened. Time will tell. :-)
>
> Is an arrest a requirement of being indicted? I'm sure that sounds like
> a dumb question, but I never really thought about the idea before that
> anyone who goes to trial was, by defintion, previously arrested for
> something, that you couldn't be "charged" without having been
> "arrested."
>
> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
>
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 10/14/2011 2:19 AM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>> > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>>>
>>>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>>>
>>> I doubt there are many here who would find it surprising that he'd
>>> get
>>> one. But it's kinda gone on a whole lot longer than anybody thought
>>> it
>>> would. Or should I be including you as a subset of anybody? I mean
>>> seriously, you've been posting about this eventuality for a very,
>>> very
>>> long time, yet instead of ever suggesting that it's been frustrating
>>> because it's been dragging out for so long, your posts continue to
>>> imply
>>> "new& exciting!"
>>
>> It is really not surprising that the investigation has taken this
>> long. It's a complex money and other evidence trail to follow.
>>>
>>> I think it's reasonable to assume that, here on RBR, people generally
>>> believe that you thought a "target letter" would have come some time
>>> ago. Interested in having a sincere dialog about that? Personally,
>>> not
>>> that that matters, I would rather here your thoughts now, rather than
>>> after the fact. Whatever the fact may end up being.
>>
>> My impression from his attorney's actions is that Armstrong received a
>> target letter a while back. He may have been subpoenaed of late, but
>> the more I consider it, the wholesale cancellation of his Brazil trip
>> would not be caused by a subpoena that could be rescheduled. While my
>> criminal attorney friends think it un-likely that the US Attorney
>> would let him avoid the perp walk by giving him advance notice of an
>> indictment and arrest so he could quietly turn himself in, I think
>> that may be what has happened. Time will tell. :-)
>>>
>>> Thanks-
>>>
>>> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
>>> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
Indictment or
Information------->Arrest---------->Arraignment------->Bail
Hearing-------->Discovery and motion practice---->Plea or
Trial------>Verdict----->If guilty, pre-sentencing period and
reports---->Sentencing

[atriage[_6_]]

On 14/10/2011 23:45, BL wrote:

> BL Dream------>LA Arrest---------->Arraignment------->Bail
> Hearing-------->Discovery and motion practice---->Plea or
> Trial------>Verdict----->If guilty, pre-sentencing period and
> reports---->Sentencing------->wakes up disappointed.


--

[BL[_2_]]

On 10/14/2011 6:48 PM, atriage wrote:
> On 14/10/2011 23:45, BL wrote:
>
>> BL Dream------>LA Arrest---------->Arraignment------->Bail
>> Hearing-------->Discovery and motion practice---->Plea or
>> Trial------>Verdict----->If guilty, pre-sentencing period and
>> reports---->Sentencing------->wakes up disappointed.
>
>
If he gets to the sentencing phase, nothing could possibly disappoint me.

[atriage[_6_]]

On 14/10/2011 23:56, BL wrote:
> On 10/14/2011 6:48 PM, atriage wrote:
>> On 14/10/2011 23:45, BL wrote:
>>
>>> BL Dream------>LA Arrest---------->Arraignment------->Bail
>>> Hearing-------->Discovery and motion practice---->Plea or
>>> Trial------>Verdict----->If guilty, pre-sentencing period and
>>> reports---->Sentencing------->wakes up disappointed.
>>
>>
> If he gets to the sentencing phase, nothing could possibly disappoint me.

He'll probably get 20 hours community service supervising Lindsay Lohan, I guess
you'll be happy with that huh?

--

[Fred Flintstein]

On 10/14/2011 6:03 PM, atriage wrote:
> On 14/10/2011 23:56, BL wrote:
>> On 10/14/2011 6:48 PM, atriage wrote:
>>> On 14/10/2011 23:45, BL wrote:
>>>
>>>> BL Dream------>LA Arrest---------->Arraignment------->Bail
>>>> Hearing-------->Discovery and motion practice---->Plea or
>>>> Trial------>Verdict----->If guilty, pre-sentencing period and
>>>> reports---->Sentencing------->wakes up disappointed.
>>>
>>>
>> If he gets to the sentencing phase, nothing could possibly disappoint me.
>
> He'll probably get 20 hours community service supervising Lindsay Lohan,
> I guess you'll be happy with that huh?
>

Fockstick,

She doesn't look anything like his mom.

F

[atriage[_6_]]

On 15/10/2011 03:03, Fred Flintstein wrote:
> On 10/14/2011 6:03 PM, atriage wrote:
>> On 14/10/2011 23:56, BL wrote:
>>> On 10/14/2011 6:48 PM, atriage wrote:
>>>> On 14/10/2011 23:45, BL wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> BL Dream------>LA Arrest---------->Arraignment------->Bail
>>>>> Hearing-------->Discovery and motion practice---->Plea or
>>>>> Trial------>Verdict----->If guilty, pre-sentencing period and
>>>>> reports---->Sentencing------->wakes up disappointed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> If he gets to the sentencing phase, nothing could possibly disappoint me.
>>
>> He'll probably get 20 hours community service supervising Lindsay Lohan,
>> I guess you'll be happy with that huh?
>>
>
> Fockstick,
>
> She doesn't look anything like his mom.
>

Hey that's the punishment element of the sentence.

--

[Simply Fred]

atriage wrote:
>>> He'll probably get 20 hours community service supervising Lindsay Lohan,
>>> I guess you'll be happy with that huh?

Fred Flintstein wrote:
>> She doesn't look anything like his mom.

atriage wrote:
> Hey that's the punishment element of the sentence.

If the berliner or Magilla were indicted I know what the sentence would be.

[Fred Flintstein]

On 10/15/2011 4:04 AM, Simply Fred wrote:
> atriage wrote:
>>>> He'll probably get 20 hours community service supervising Lindsay
>>>> Lohan,
>>>> I guess you'll be happy with that huh?
>
> Fred Flintstein wrote:
>>> She doesn't look anything like his mom.
>
> atriage wrote:
>> Hey that's the punishment element of the sentence.
>
> If the berliner or Magilla were indicted I know what the sentence would be.

Their community service would be served at the dentist's
office.

F

[BL[_2_]]

On 10/14/2011 7:03 PM, atriage wrote:
> On 14/10/2011 23:56, BL wrote:
>> On 10/14/2011 6:48 PM, atriage wrote:
>>> On 14/10/2011 23:45, BL wrote:
>>>
>>>> BL Dream------>LA Arrest---------->Arraignment------->Bail
>>>> Hearing-------->Discovery and motion practice---->Plea or
>>>> Trial------>Verdict----->If guilty, pre-sentencing period and
>>>> reports---->Sentencing------->wakes up disappointed.
>>>
>>>
>> If he gets to the sentencing phase, nothing could possibly disappoint me.
>
> He'll probably get 20 hours community service supervising Lindsay Lohan,
> I guess you'll be happy with that huh?
>
What did I write, Moron. A guilty fining is all I need to be completely
satisfied. In fact, I'll be 99% satisfied with just an indictment.

[atriage[_6_]]

On 15/10/2011 17:12, BL wrote:
> I'll be 99% satisfied with just an indictment.

Whatever gets ya thru the night....s'alright
--

[Frederick the Great]

In article >,
Simply Fred > wrote:

> atriage wrote:
> >>> He'll probably get 20 hours community service supervising Lindsay Lohan,
> >>> I guess you'll be happy with that huh?
>
> Fred Flintstein wrote:
> >> She doesn't look anything like his mom.
>
> atriage wrote:
> > Hey that's the punishment element of the sentence.
>
> If the berliner or Magilla were indicted I know what the sentence would be.

Forbidden to speak or write `*****'.

--
Old Fritz

[Fred Flintstein]

On 10/12/2011 9:28 AM, BL wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:
>> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>
>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.

Cancer conference at Harvard Medical, the release of a report
by an organization where he is an honorary co-president.

http://www.msh.org/news-bureau/readily-available-and-affordable-cancer-prevention-treatment-and-pain-relief-interventions-could-decrease-deaths-and-improve-the-lives-of-millions-in-developing-countries.cfm

There are pictures on facebook.

Good guess though. You're hardly ever wrong about this sort of
thing. Dumbass.

F

[Brad Anders]

On Oct 12, 10:57*am, BL > wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 11:26 AM, Brad Anders wrote:
> > On Oct 12, 7:53 am, > *wrote:
> >> On 10/12/2011 10:46 AM, Brad Anders wrote:> *On Oct 12, 7:28 am, > * *wrote:
> >>>> On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:> * *Personal reasons. Target letter?
>
> >>>>>http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>
> >>>> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.
>
> >>> He was here in Phoenix last weekend, doing a local tri. According to
> >>> my friends who raced with him, he was not in handcuffs.
>
> >> No ****. What does that have to do with canceling his trip and the
> >> reason? Answer--Nothing. *Back into your hole, Brad
>
> > Hey, I'm not the one responding to my own post with more wild-ass
> > conjectures, Brian. At least my post is based in fact.
>
> Wild ass conjecture?? Now that's amusing, Brad.

Which is what it turned out to be, so you must be in hysterics.

[Fred Flintstein]

On 11/2/2011 10:25 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
> On Oct 12, 10:57 am, > wrote:
>> On 10/12/2011 11:26 AM, Brad Anders wrote:
>>> On Oct 12, 7:53 am, > wrote:
>>>> On 10/12/2011 10:46 AM, Brad Anders wrote:> On Oct 12, 7:28 am, > wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/12/2011 10:24 AM, BL wrote:> Personal reasons. Target letter?
>>
>>>>>>> http://midiasport.com.br/noticiasDetalhes.php?cd=5601
>>
>>>>>> Possibly served with a Grand Jury Subpoena.
>>
>>>>> He was here in Phoenix last weekend, doing a local tri. According to
>>>>> my friends who raced with him, he was not in handcuffs.
>>
>>>> No ****. What does that have to do with canceling his trip and the
>>>> reason? Answer--Nothing. Back into your hole, Brad
>>
>>> Hey, I'm not the one responding to my own post with more wild-ass
>>> conjectures, Brian. At least my post is based in fact.
>>
>> Wild ass conjecture?? Now that's amusing, Brad.
>
> Which is what it turned out to be, so you must be in hysterics.

If you can't trust a California pro cyclist, who can you trust?

F

[Simply Fred]

Fred Flintstein wrote:
> If you can't trust a California pro cyclist, who can you trust?

A Kazakh pro cyclist ?