bobke -- Yes, I agree. It's clear LA is right. But LA's statement on Le Monde article provides further support (even more, on top of already convincing arguments I have described above):
1. It is crazy that the doctor would only have asked about LA's history of using drugs three days after invasive brain sugery, which is when Ms. Andreu alleges the conversation took place:
"In addition to sworn testimony to the contrary by others present, the panel (and the insurance company) were provided certified copies of all medical records by the Indiana cancer hospital. While any suggestion that medical professionals did not take my medical history until three days after conducting extensive brain surgery is, on its face, preposterous, it is inconceivable that the records, which contain a description of every interaction with me, would not reflect such a critical response. There is no suggestion of either such a question or response in over 20 medical histories recorded among the 280 pages of records compiled during my hospital stay. My doctor, one of the premier cancer specialists in the country, also testified no such statement was made by me to him and a statement made to another would have to appear in the records. It's not there because it never happened."
Also, LA of course naturally points to the absence of any such statement in the voluminous medical records that exist.
2. Andreus Don't Remember Much Else, but the alleged LA statements
"Mr. and Mrs. Andreu stated that they left the room right after the statement, could remember no other questions asked before or after, no details of who I was allegedly talking to, whether men or women, whether doctors or residents, or why I would have been asked this information in front of 10 people, including my mother, in a TV room watching the Dallas Cowboys play football on a Sunday afternoon."
3. Arbitrators between insurers and LA didn't give credence to Ms Andreu's allegations
"After years of litigation and three weeks of trial, and " having considered the evidence and testimony" the panel ordered the insurance company to pay, not the $5mm owed, but that $5mm and an additional $2.5mm, which confirms the baseless nature of the accusations. The allegations were rejected. It's over. We won. They lost. I was yet again completely vindicated"
Now it is learned that the insurance company paid LA an extra $2.5M in penalties for having challenged his entitlement to the basic $5M performance bonus. LA deserves every cent of the $7.5M total insurance pay-out and penalty he got from the insurance company.
Little Twist
And then LA also insinuates that D Pound may have released documents after being blistered by the Vrijnman report:
"We have instituted proceedings to determine who did so; ironically, but predictably, our investigation to date has revealed that the only person to whom documents have been provided by any trial participant is Richard Pound of WADA. It is indeed coincidental that the documents provided to the press surfaced shortly after the independent investigator from the UCI released his report which exonerated me and was sharply critical of Mr. Pound's conduct."