I started to read it, but something came up before I got too far - I said to myself 'I'll try again later'

However, before I could return, a writer friend of mine called it "misogynistic murder porn" and "It’s a PR piece to help out a buddy of the magazine"

Someone else posted, "usually not one to root against print media but @outsidemagazine deserves every bit of their impending bankruptcy for running this story"

Yet another person said, "It's not easy to turn the story of a woman murdering another woman into a story about a man, but it should have been easy to scrap it before publication."

A bunch of Zero-Star reviews, I'd say; so I'm not sure if I want to give Outside those clicks back

You forgot to quote the next sentence: "Strickland still comes off as an emotionally stunted douchebag who treated Armstrong terribly."

Strickland sucks, but he didn't pull the trigger.
Although, I wonder if he could sued for purchasing the gun and creating the circumstances for her death.

Didn't he? It almost seems like Armstrong's lawyers might be leaning towards saying he did. Did anyone see who was driving his motorcycle or her car around the times of the murder? I am just imagining what they may say..
BTW, who the f doesn't ditch a gun that was just used in a murder?!!!! Good grief!

I'm surprised anyone at Outside reviewed the piece and thought to themselves This Looks Great, Let's Publish It.

It almost seems like Armstrong's lawyers might be leaning towards saying he did.


As usual Armstrong's Defense lawyers are keeping their cards close to the chest. But I did see it written somewhere they have said, "wait until the trial" - hinting that, apparently we, the police etc . . have this all wrong! Or is this just the usual criminal political posturing and flexing?

Pretty common for the defense in a high profile case to be bluster and bombast until they get sworn in and have to tell the truth under penalty of perjury.

I think i have watched too many detective series on Youtube. They have evidence his motorcycle was somewhere else. Do they know for certain it is him riding it?

Outside has a long piece on this tragic case here:
https://www.outsideonline.com/...urder-gravel-racing/

The writer seems a little too close to some of the figures to provide a balanced account, so some aspects might strike you as problematic.

She again tried to go fugitive?

Quote:

after about 10 minutes, officers caught up to her and restrained her

That's a solid run, though. Got past the initial sprint phase into full VO2 max interval effort. It sounds like it might have been well over a mile?

She again tried to go fugitive?

Quote:

after about 10 minutes, officers caught up to her and restrained her

That's a solid run, though. Got past the initial sprint phase into full VO2 max interval effort. It sounds like it might have been well over a mile?

Did they stop her Garmin when they cuffed her?

No Strava but there is video. She has better form than her chaser...

Your link is broken.

This is the correct link.

I'm a mechanical engineer. In instances like this, and other times trying to understand unhinged humans like this woman, I kinda wish I would've put more effort towards psych classes or even a psych major. I just can't put any of the puzzles pieces together to even try to understand the thought process. It's just scary there are people like this roaming around out there.

Looking at her actions after she murdered Mo it's basically self preservation. She knew she was going to jail for 20 to life, fleeing the country and getting plastic surgery isn't the worst idea. It's wrong, morally reprehensible, and illegal, but from a self preservation instinct it makes sense. Likewise, she's now looking at guaranteed life in jail after fleeing and had a low security opportunity to escape. The chances of getting away are 1 in 1,000,000 but thats better than the chances of not trying, which i life in prison either way.

I'm not saying anything she did was right or good or anything like that, just that it's not inexplicable.