Audio tape evidence? There is something which seems suspicious .. . .
There's clearly a lot of evidence about doping and cheating and cover ups in this film. I'm only halfway through and it's overwhelming to be sure. But there's something I find highly suspicious. …The bit about Frankie Andreu secretly audio taping Armstrong's agents in France right after the Walsh book came out. What Frankie and Betsy say is:
"They wanted Betsy to sign a blanket statement/affidavit saying she would never say or do anything against Lance."
But the audio tape they include in the movie? Has nothing even close to that. Far from it. They include 4 quotes from Armstrong's agent, and it's generic press release/spin control questions. Hardly incriminating at all for either the agent or Armstrong. Yet what Frankie and Betsy SAY they said was far more slanted and characterized as cover-up, requests for them to lie to the press, etc. etc. IF the audio tape - which Frankie says he taped *'everything'* - has the people saying such very incriminating things then why wasn't it included in the movie? I find that very . . . Suspicious. Which then makes me wonder .. . If most of this movie is based on what Frankie and Betsy are saying then . . .should I find them suspicious as well?
Here are the quotes:
Attorney Tillotson:
Mr. Armstrong's legal team was very concerned about the book and wanted to discredit David Walsh. They knew one of the sources was likely Besty Andreu. And they wanted Betsy Andreu and Frankie Andreu to distance themselves from the book and say 'Mr. Walsh had it wrong'.
Frankie:
Lance told me that his two agents Bill Stapleton and Barton Knaggs wanted to talk with me. So I was like 'Okay, I knew it was coming, I knew what it was going to be about'.
Betsy:
So he asked me, 'Should I tape the conversation?" I said, "Hell yeah, because they'll say it never happened."
Frankie:
We met in the parking lot of the Tour de France start after all of the riders had left. I put a tape recorder in my pocket and I tape-recorded everything.
On tape:
- Bill:
"So is Betsy willing to issue an statement or go on record that she said no comment to Walsh?"
- Frankie:
"She did not tell David Walsh about the hospital room. I know that for sure. Because I never told. . . <fades out>"
Current Frankie: Because I didn't trust these guys you know? Still don't trust them. We talked about how bad this would be for the sport if Lance gets in trouble and all this comes out.
On tape:
Bill:
"Because the other option is full-out war in the French court. It could blow the whole sport."
Current Frankie:
They wanted her to sign an affidavit saying that she would never go against Lance Armstrong for the rest of her life, or something crazy.
On tape:
- Frankie:
"So you want her to come out with a statement saying "I will never testify against Lance"?"
- Bill:
"Well I mean, she could . . . She could make a supportive statement about Lance"
- Frankie:
"You know her and Lance don't get along. She's not gonna come out with a statement saying "I like Lance. Lance is a good guy." "
- Bill:
"So maybe we can craft something that she's comfortable with? "
Current Frankie: <scoffs>
"You can imagine when I brought that up to Betsy: "So Bets they want you to sign something saying you'll never sue or go against Lance" It was just a bunch of cuss words".
---
Note that when Frankie directly asks 'So you want Betsy to come out with a statement saying I will never testify against Lance" the reply - at least, what we are shown after the magic of editing - is a far more generic "She could make a supportive statement about Lance". ?
I just find this bit not believable. Frankie and Betsy are asserting some damaging statements were made, state that they have the direct evidence to prove it in this very damning documentary which we are then shown snippets of . . . But they leave out the most damning bits of what was allegedly said on the tape?! Suspicious.
I find most of the people making statements quite credible and I am in no way saying I think Lance is innocent. But I do find this non-inclusion of taped evidence quite suspect indeed. I wonder what was on tape that they didn't include?
And I concur with another thread that Betsy Andreu sure seems like she has an axe to grind. Certainly one would if they felt their husband was treated unfairly, to be sure. But she has not one good thing to say whatsoever; she is categorically damning in her beliefs about Lance Armstrong. That leads me to think she's overly biased. Things are rarely completely black or completely white; there are almost always shades of grey. But Betsy Andreu seems completely, unequivocally certain in her position. I'd rather get the whole picture, good with the bad, than a biased view. I'm going to watch The Armstrong Lie next to see if I can get a fuller picture.
share