Roger Clemens Not Guilty on All Counts
 

Prosecution did not prove its case.

Thoughts?

We'll get him, in a Vegas hotel room.

In 20-30 years, I think when one looks back on his career (and his d!ckheaded personality is forgotten about) he'll go down as as one of the greatest pitchers of the late 80s and 90s (the steroid era).

A big waste of time...and taxpayer $$$$. I'm not surprised though with the outcome.

Post of the day!

Guilty in the public opinion will be enough. As great as he was, he will be grouped in the "Steroid Family". When his name first surfaced, I was hoping it wasn't true.... I just need to 'misremember' the past...

Three thoughts:

1) Prosecution wasted a whole lot of time and money.

2) Defense team was the best money could buy.

3) Despite the verdict, he used PEDs.

Barry
 

During Roger's pitching years, I was never a fan of his. However, I met him and his family in Cooperstown (in a restaurant) on
HOF weekend 2 years ago; and, he was very friendly and cordial to us.

"Lying" to some of those lying jerks in Congress is a laugher....so, I am happy for him that the jury decided that he did not lie
to Congress.

This by no means suggest that I condone steroids usage. But, why was he singled out from a host of "users" ?


TED Z

I think Jeffrey Toobin (CNN) probably right: Federal juries do not believe that abuse of steroids by professional athletes raises issues appropriate for the criminal justice system. Not overly concerned with lying to Congress either.

Smooth sailing to HOF now?

I always liked Clemens, and we have the same birthday (probably not factored in during the trial), but....you hate to see someone get away with cheating.

He was found not guilty of perjury, right?
Not of cheating. I think that most assume he was a user due to his age defying feats of greatness.

"Regardless of the verdict of juries...." ($1) to the estate of KM Landis. I surely hope not.

None of us were there so we don't know if he cheated or not. The jury had all the facts and they said there was not adequate proof that he did so I have to yield to them. What I do know is that when Clemens was with the Yankees he was very generous with his time for numerous charitable organizations and very good with all the kids he interacted with.

All that said, this witch hunt for juicers is a waste of money at a time when money is short. Mandate that all congressional investigations be done without TV coverage and I think the d-ckheads in Washington may be forced to do some real work instead of just trying to maximize face time in front of their constituents.

And BTW, Clemens, Bonds and Arod should all be first ballot HOFers.

He's a douche. Can we say douche?

I followed the trial somewhat and I knew it was over when Andy Pettite said there was a 50% chance he misremembered that Clemens told him that he took PEDs. That was the prosecution's ace in the hole and they were pretty much doomed from that point on.

I read Michael O'Keeffe's American Icon: The Fall of Roger Clemens and the Rise of Steroids in America's Pastime and there's no doubt that Clemens was juicing. In that 400 page book there were just too many little details to prove otherwise.

Here's a good video to watch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sf-el...eature=related

Funny how all the Balco guys and guys in the Mitchell Report accused of steroids not one guy went to jail. MLB steroid program is a joke.

Right...that HGH really was for his wife. :rolleyes: Either way, there were so many cheaters during the last 2.5 decades in baseball it's frivolous to try and determine who was and who wasn't a user...the whole era deserves an asterisk. The Hall of Fame is a joke and has been ever since the veterans started putting in their undeserving pals so I could care less who goes in and who doesn't.

Dan (markel)----If the book constructs an iron clad argument that Clemens used steroids then all the prosecution had to do was read the book to the jury and Clemens would have been convicted. My guess is that O'Keefe's argument was not as convincing as you make it out to be. Perhaps you were convinced before you read the book. They had all the facts; you don't.

You are overlooking that evidence frequently is not admissible.

Old Judge do you really not think that he cheated? If you don't, without saying that it hasn't been proven, why don't you think he cheated? Just curious.

I don't think he'll ever get in the HOF. Here is a link to the 2012 voting. You will see that Rafi and McGwire faired pretty terribly. My man Don Mattingly (not a cheater) got more votes than Palmiero despite his 569 home runs and 3,000 plus hits.

I don't know if he cheated or not; I wasn't there. Therefore, my opinion would only be a guess. I haven't listened to the facts, like the jury. If after hearing the facts they thought that there was not compelling evidence that he did steroids then I must guess that he did not.
Peter--I was just making the point that if O'Keefe could make an open and shut case, based on facts and not assumptions, that Clemens juiced then the prosecution could have probably made a strong argument, a winning argument, that he was guilty. Obviously, that was not the case.

Mattingly had half a HOF career. Unfortunately, a bad back killed the second half.

The jury didn't decide he didn't use steroids though. They decided it wasn't proven he lied about using steroids. There's a big difference. It's hard to prove someone lied about something you can't prove without a doubt they did.

The point of the Mitchell Report was both to inform baseball what was going on and to inform the fans of what their favorite players have been up to. If you refuse to acknowledge any of the report's information because it can't be proven, then I think you are missing the point. At the same token you can't prove anyone didn't use steroids.

I never said iron clad. I would say it's more likely that Clemens did juice than not juice - a big difference. I don't know what you mean by "they had all the facts". If you are referring to the defense team as "they", that's a laugh. All they did was cast a shread of doubt in the prosecution's witnesses. If Clemens was an innocent as he claims, why didn't he just take the stand?

And a jury acquited OJ. Sometimes, it's just hard to prove things with admissible evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. But I wouldn't infer innocence from that. Change the burden of proof and you might have a different verdict. The jury also could be sending a message that this sort of prosecution is a waste of time and money.

Yep. Never used 'em. And thought that Piazza's broken bat was a baseball, so he grabbed it and threw it at him. Thinking back on this, a) how the heck was he not thrown out of the game and suspended and b) how come no one suspected Roid Rage at that time?

In retrospect, the people I feel sorry for are the guys who played clean and would have been considered the best of their decade, if the top ten (or twenty) players hadn't been cheating. Sad part is, we'll never know who they were for certain.

Not guilty on all counts
 

What a joke....

I can understand how he can be found not guilty. However, I don't understand how people can continue to say that he didn't cheat and that he's a HOFer. People often ask why the public is so upset that Clemens, Palmeiro, and Bonds cheated but don't care that the David Segui's of the world cheated. The answer is pretty obvious to me. Clemens and Bonds were already HOFers. What makes people so upset is that even with all the gifts and good fortune the world had to give them, they STILL cheated. That's what makes them worse than any marginal player just trying to make a living. That's what should keep them OUT of the HOF.

Let's hope they have their health in front of them. But will anyone be surprised if they don't?

But the Mitchell Report was based on Brian Mcnamee's testimony atleast for Clemens being on it. But if a jury finds Clemens not guilty, then they must think Mcnamee's testimony is in doubt. So if they can't back his testimony in court, then what proof is there that Clemens actually used?

Also I think the Mitchell report was a huge joke and 90% biased against NY teams.

Bonds....
 

How can anyone with a head the size of a medicine ball have his health in front of him?

The jury has to consider facts. The Mitchell Report was based on conversations between investigators, personnel and players. The burden of proof in a courtroom is different. If you can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that everything McNamee said is true, that doesn't mean it isn't true.

How can anyone with a head the size of a medicine ball have his health in front of him?

+1

Wonder why we waste tax dollars on things like Clemons and Barry Bonds? Pretty sure they both used PEDs even if the didn't admit it. And why congress ever got involved is beyond me.

The idea of politicians taking offense at someone lying to them, is laughable, considering their careers are built on lies and they are almost psychopathic in the ease with which they can bs the people and maintain a straight face.

Not to be construed as a defense of Clemens, however.

To me Clemens is no worse than any other cheater, whether they've been caught or not, but to boot, he's almost as easy to dislike as Bonds, almost.

...........inclined to agree but haven't seen many others try to pass it off on their wife.

I have reading through these post and wanted to clear up some things about athletes using banned drugs in the past. First off, I was an Collegiate shot putter in the late 70's and early 80's. So I know something about steroid use back long ago. The drugs that are banned now where not banned back then. You could even get them over the counter. In matter of fact there where no bans on anything in MLB until 1991. WADA over sees what is banned. In the early 90's and even up to 2001 the list of banned substances was held primarily to only the anabolic steroids. Many things banned now where legal back then. Since then the list has grown to the point of being ridicules. Let me give you some examples. My son has been on the national scene in track for several years and has mild asthma. To be able to use an Abuteral inhaler he had to under go about $2000 worth of test AFTER being off all other asthma medications for 2 months so the test would show he had breathing problems. We had to submit a T.U.E. to WADA and waited 6 mo. to the the approval. God forbid you get a head cold. Nothing you can take over the counter is legal either. I don't see condemning people for doing something that was ok to do at the time.

I cant say a lot about the Clemens situation. I dont know all the facts. I don't know if he was doing banned drugs or if he lied about it. If he did then he should be punished for it.

And once again, an individual with celebrity or noteriety or money is acquitted.
I don't care how many sports statues or napkins he signed, he has always been and always will be a jackass. :mad:

And he is also probably the greatest pitcher of our generation (irrespective of whether he did or did not do peds late in his career) who was also smart enough to hire a really, really, good lawyer.

Nolan Ryan was born in 1947-retired in 1993 .. at 46. His last pitch was recorded at 98 mph.

Bob Beaman's long jump record stood for almost 23 years.

Before Beaman.. the long Jump record was held by Jesse Owens and he held it for 25 years.

It doesn't pay to hold on to naivety or cynicism with too much gusto.

Saying everyone juiced is like saying everyone who grew up in the 70s tripped on LSD at least once and that's not true. Did Ryan, Beaman, and Owens juice? ... doubtful.

Taking both possibilities into consideration is the fair route.

Clemens had a dominant arm, I saw that arm throw 99mph when he was 19 at The University of Texas... So he does a long stint in the majors where he puts that arm on display and earns enough to retire many times over. ... "but, but,but, then at the end he started juicing because he had some more to prove'" .. He wasn't a shoe in Hall of Famer at 38, 39, 40? There is no news of a Bankruptcy or Finance killing divorce in his late career.

Im not surprised by the decision today.. I think it was the right one. Did Clemens "Hell with you" attitude come from knowing he was innocent? Or did it come from arrogance? Bill Russell pretty much owned the "Hell with You" attitude during his playing days ... arrogant? .. or just mistrusting of the press and outsiders as a rarer, then, Black pro athlete in the era of civil rights?

A Congressman could never assume the same ilk as the Duke LaCrosse Team prosecutor .. right? A natural drum beater/grandstander would never get caught up in that right?

Lying to a Federal Official is a Felony .. I don't suppose any player who was caught doing that might try to cut a deal by making up a story about a "Bigger Fish" in an attempt to save himself some jail time... that could never happen...

Do I know if Clemens juiced ? No ... but I will say this. I believe his arm was of the caliber that if he took care of himself he certainly wouldn't have needed enhancement at 38, 39, 40, possibly 41 ... So did he hit 41,42 and then decide to go rogue?

Maybe someone should interview Olympic Swimmer Dara Torres and ask her what she thought about Clemens .. She won 3 Silvers in Beijing in 2008 at 41 years old. She'll be swimming at the Olympic Swimming Trials in Omaha attempting to make the 2012 Team 6 days from now at 45.

The great thing about this country is that you can assume whatever you want, based on a lot of facts or none, and plaster it all over the web. If you want to assume that Clemens juiced that is your prerogative. I choose to not convict people unless I have definitive proof, which I don't in this case. Let's agree to disagree.
TBob, why all the anger towards Clemens? Have you ever met him or known anyone who has?

I love this post !!!! Thanks for the smile Bob :)

Regardless of what people assume, you are innocent until proven guilty- and he was found not guilty. I'm not defending him, I don't know if he did them or not. He insists he didn't. What makes him a liar? What someone else said?

Sincerely, Clayton

Phone call with Clemens accuser
 

Here's a transcript of Clemens accuser.. Brian McNamee and Clemens that is supposed to be McNamee getting Clemens to confess on the phone.

McNamee is a former NYC Police officer who obtained illegal drugs and distributed them .. a felony. Was he motivated? considering what often happens to Cops in prison? I don't suppose he needed immunity from prosecution to live... Im not saying this is what happened.. I don't know.. but I think its certainly plausible.

I read the transcript from stem to stern and don't see how they listed this phone conversation as a compelling argument for accusing Clemens.

transcript:
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ba...ticle-1.341912

That thing is supposed to be a "confession"? Hahahahahaha! I can see why these genius government lawyers lost.

Congrats to the jury for getting it right.

Cheers,
Blair

Yeah, I just read all of that transcript myself and what a bunch of garbage.

With friends like that, who needs enemies? :rolleyes:

And, in all of that conversation, he never once said he used PED's. Sounded like Mac was trying to set him up IMO. I mean, who recorded this call?

Sincerely, Clayton

How come no one ever accuses of suspected Griffey Jr. of juicing? But they do Clemens?

You got it...but the biggest joke is that this idiot cop-turned-drug-dealer is the only one who comes off looking guilty in this transcript...suggesting he himself should go to jail, etc...nice "interrogation". What a complete clown!

You tell me - which one of these guys is the scumbag:

McNamee: Tell me what you want me to do. I told you in the (unintelligible). What do you want me to do? I'll go to jail, I'll do whatever you want.

Clemens: I need somebody to tell the truth, Mac.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ba...#ixzz1yDhJeC5c

Cheers,
Blair

Sorry, but it was the other way around. It was Clemens recording McNamee and in my opinion, Clemens and his army of lawyers, detectives and other henchmen sunk to a major low when they publicly disclosed without the McNamee family's consent that McNamee's son was dying. It was mentioned in this article below. What this article doesn't mention is that there were two recorded conversations, this one over the phone and another with some private investigators Clemens hired who met McNamee in person. In both cases, McNamee never admitted that he lied about Clemens.

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/...-perjury-trial

Jr was completly broke down and talent gone by the tme he was 40. Clemens got better from 35 on. Not saying Jr did or didnt but the human body doesnt get better with age. I dont know if Clemens did or didnt either but like with Bonds there isnt much doubt in my mind.

First off, to those who say that the MLB testing policy is a joke, remember this; the Commissioner's Office said in 1993 that PED use was against the rules. However, the PLAYERS UNION was against those rules and the owners didn't have the balls to fight the PU.

Another joke is Andy Pettitte.

The retired Pettitte clearly remembers what Roger Clemens said and tells the authorities about it.

The UN-retired Pettitte gets on the stand and says there is a 50% chance that he "misremembered" what Clemens told him.

Gee, imagine that; a guy who wants to get back into the game, make millions of dollars playing for the Yankees and doesn't want to make any waves or have any retaliation for testifying does just enough to torpedo the prosecution that allows Clemens to go free....

David

To the person who said there was a New York bias, look at the FACTS.

Andy Pettitte has admitted to using HGH.

Alex Rodriguez ADMITTED to using PED's BUT only did so AFTER YEARS of denying using them and only AFTER he signed a new, long term contract that had NO wording in it for admitting previous PED use.

So, A Rod gets a conscience and wants to tell the truth about his PED use only AFTER he gets a new contract. What a swell guy.

Do you really think the Yankees would have agreed to that big contract if A Rod had admitted to previous PED use?

A Rod is now what, 37? Where are the big offensive numbers he is getting paid to produce? Why isn't he putting up BETTER numbers at 37 than he did at 27 (like Barry Bonds did?).

Oh, that is right. A Rod is clean now and putting up numbers like NORMAL 37 -year old players historically produced before the Steroid Era. Ie, good numbers but ones that are LESS than they did in their younger years. Numbers that are NOT worth what he is getting paid to produce.

David