Originally Posted by
donrhummy
2. Vaughters alleged IM conversation. First off, this has nothing to do with the 2002 stage that the reviewer brings up here (as the IM conversation refers to 2004) so no idea why he connects the two but even with that, Vaughters has denied the conversation is real and it didn't stand up in court. Why then would Landis put it in his book, bringing up that alleged (and Vaughters-denied) conversation?
To the best of my knowledge, it's not an "alledged" IM conversation, which would indicate it might not have happened. Neither Vaughters or Andreau have made this allegation, it was subpoenaed and retrieved from a computer that stored the messages (conspiracy theorists, have a field day).
It "stood up" in court in that it was allowed into evidence and on record. Vaughters has said he "exaggerated" some portions, which has a bit of the endemic "I don't recall" that has permeated our government officials current testimony.
If you have contradictory information, please forward the sources, hopefully it's something beyond one of the many reviews/spin cycles that swirl around this question.