More trouble for McNamee
Posted by: Peter Abraham - Posted in Misc on Jan 08, 2008 
Print This Post
| 
Email This Post
A St. Petersburg, Fla., police detective wrote in a report that Brian McNamee lied to him during the investigation of a possible rape in 2001. Here’s the AP story.
As days pass, it becomes harder to believe McNamee. There is documented evidence that he lied to reporters over the years. He has contradicted himself on other occasions and now apparently he lied to police.
McNamee lied to reporters. McNamee lied to the cops. But he told the truth to George Mitchell?
A friend asked me this question today: Is it possible McNamee injected Roger Clemens with steroids but told him they were painkillers or B-12? McNamee was a nobody until he started training Clemens. Might he have been so desperate to keep his job that he resorted to steroids to give Clemens a false sense of accomplishment?
too conspiracy theorist for my taste
Gee, way to help turn the page on the steroid era Selig.
I wondered about that, if that was true, I don’t know how it would fly with the public. Espically since Sheffield and others have used that excuse.
The one who is really in a bad spot right now is Pettitte, he used HGH twice, yet his name keeps getting linked about to Roger and Mcnamee. Congress will likely supena him hoping that Roger said something to Andy re: roids, hgh etc.
If you check the comments from a few days ago, I posed the theory that McNamee injected Clemens and told him it was B12.
Attention Blog:
With the Hall of Fame votws today, and all the big Clemens steriod talk going around, I believe we have accidently overlooked the birhtday of 1B/DH Jason Giambi. If I still know how to add, today he turned 37!
Happy Birthday Jason!
whaaaaa.. attempted rape?
but how would clemens prove that he lied to mitchell in a court of law? i’m not a lawyer, but this seems pretty tough to me
Marc, Bud is another one sitting in his ivory tower. He was the commish when the roid era was at his highest.
Yet he has skated in the media in general. Also in retrospect was this report such a good thing? Did they really need to do this? All it has done is keep steriods and baseball on the front page papers.
Edit:
votws=votes,
birhtday=birthday
kd it would prove that he isn’t this truthful figure he is trying to protray himself as.
I seem to be in the minority now, but even if Clemens wins in court, I still think he did PED’s. McNamee might not be credible in the legal world, but his accounts about this and Clemens’ performance are quite consistent.
After all, OJ is innocent as far as the criminal case goes.
I don’t believe McNamee nor Clemens anymore. I wish they’d both just go away.
Too Munchausen Syndrome for my tastes. But I do think that McNamee is in the situation he’s in because of bad judgement, bad character, and poor decisions. That’s neither here nor there in regards to Clemens. But it still sucks for Roger and his familty.
Whoa I didn’t realize that someone actually caught him in the act!! He is such a sleaze ball!!
I would like to ask Roger on thing though, why would you hire someone accused of rape to work for you? He would be around your wife.
We knew all of this anyway. But the smear campaign is kicking into high gear.
Jennifer – He was hired by the Yankees and Roger before he was accused of rape. They both fired him.
Whoa, that’s a turn-around. I admit although still on the fence about Roger the idea of being guilty until innocent has been bothering me. Also, I did a bit of homework about McNamee and this guy has a really checkered past – I think that is what Clemens and his attorney were pointing towards yesterday without coming and defaming McNamee. The whole PhD thing – asking his clients to call him Dr. and not having a legitimate PhD on top of the rape allegations, 2 DUI’s, drug dealing, lying about unemployment, and just on and on. This guy wasn’t stupid but he is sleazy. Also, he apparently was a good trainer. He may have preferred to be known as a liar than a dealer but clearly, he is both. To call Clemens and try to get Clemens to tell him what he wanted him to do so as to entrap him, to give the papers the fact that there was a call because it didn’t go as he wanted and knew Roger would make it public, to tell Heyman all that nonsense after the 60 Minutes piece but not mention the phone call – I’d still like to know if McNamee and son are really in bad shape, if there was anyone that offered him 7 figures but I guess the easiest way for Roger to get some credibility back would be if he can provide a Dr. or a Dr’s script for the meds injected. I’ll say 1 thing – if it isn’t true that Roger Clemens took steroids but got caught up in the steroid era then that is a HUGE indictment on MLB and the media.
Pete: I asked that question yesterday.
Buddy, from the last friend: I have a few connections to Brooklyn, so it’s not an issue for me to continue to support the Nets in Brooklyn
Is it possible McNamee injected Roger Clemens with steroids but told him they were painkillers or B-12?
————————–
wouldn’t shock me.
jjnj
McNamee’s lawyer said Roger wasn’t even on their radar. So my question to McNamee, why even mention Rogers name? Was it to make fully sure that you got off without any jail time?
Boddicker: “I tell you right now, I’ve seen Roger Clemens get injected with a B-12 vitamin shot. I was in the trainer’s room back in Boston when the trainer injected him. Unless B-12 is illegal, I’m believing Roger. If it’s this guy’s word against Roger, I’ll go with Roger every time. I had a locker right next to him in Boston and I can tell you this was the most dedicated athlete I’ve ever been around. The reason he had to take the B-12 was because he overworked himself. People say he’s still performing past 40 and he must be doing something. Well, Nolan Ryan did it.”
Unfortunately, he did not say if the shot was in Rogers butt or not. A number of Doctors have stated that lidocaine does NOT get shot in the butt. Does V-B12? One issue that is not clear is IF these shots that Roger admits getting were in his butt or stomach.
McNamee is definitely a sleezebag, but that’s not the point. Sleezebags often tell the truth, and honest people sometimes lie. The real issue is if the Feds/Mitchell exerted enough pressure on McNamee for him to give Roger up, truthfully or falsely. I do believe McNamee has strong feelings for Roger, and would not give him up without a specific reason. I think the answers are in the dark room where McNamee was ‘interrorgated’.
Oops I meant to say today on Mike Kay’s show. Sorry.
Old Yanks Fan: At the press conference yesterday Clemens stated that he was injected in the back with the lidocaine, where he had the injury or whatchamacallit.
Jenn: I’m guessing it has something to do with the power aspect of it. Rape’s a crime of power, not passion.
Jennifer – thanks for posting that. I’ve read so much over the past few days it’s all a blur LOL. But I do remember them saying McNamee begged Roger to keep him despite the allegations. And I agree with you, not a smart move! I guess he trusted McNamee & felt it was false since no charges were ever filed.
I keep hearing people laughing at the notion that he was injected with litocane. I’d love to hear from anyone coroporating that you can use litocane as a numbing agent, for things other then dentistry. I’m sure he wasn’t getting the same small dose you get at a dentist office. Plus it does last quite a long time in your mouth, isn’t that what makes you swell? It can last for hours. So that would be sufficent time to get thru the 2 1/2 hours that you pitch.
Roger Clemens sure can pick them. Spend years hanging around, paying and dropping his pants for a guy who lies about raping a drugged woman. These two deserve each other.
The Mitchell report was flawed because only a few rats squealed. But at least they tried to put a light on what went on. Unlike the NFL which convinces everyone that 6’3″ 325 men with great speed and strength just happen. But both Fehr and Selig should resign for letting it happen on their watch.
Yeah, and Roger rehired him as his personal trainer after the Yankees let him go. Birds of the feather.
Jennifer: You get novacaine at the dentist’s office (trust me, god knows I could use a teeth cleaning lesson…), and lidocaine for wounds such as require stitches.
Just for kicks, I typed in litocane. Well the this is from the first site that popped up. Some of what is on the site is medically graphic, I will only post the link and the heading it is under.
Pretty interesting, if some “journalists” would have done a simple google search they’d see it has been used.
Friday, November 8, 1996 ~ 8:00 A – 2:00 P
1- Bone Spur Removal, Right Pinkie Finger
http://www.nd.edu/~lego/grp2/www/surgery.htm
Rebecca, than why do I hear everyone associating litocane with dentistry?
Found something else interesting. Someone said they had a torn labrum and they have a tube that constantly pumps litocane into their body. Seems more and more plasible to me.
Tried to find a motel in Cooperstown for induction weekend in July – booked, booked, booked. The closest I found was in Oneonta, $240 a night, with one double bed. That would be okay, but I’m going with my brother-in-law (he’s got hairy legs).
Nice report, Mitchell.
Lidocaine is a local anesthetic. It could be used to numb the area before another more painful kind of shot.
Google is a wonderful thing, what in the world did we do without it?
I thought it was very odd of Roger to mention he thought Mcnamee had a PhD, and that he did not. Well…
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/.....id=3153874
Jim PA
People probably had rooms booked in anticipation of Goose getting in. I’d still check in case some Saux’s fans booked rooms thinking that Rice would get in.
Jim: Look for somewhere around Syracuse, it’s about an hour, hour and a half drive from Cooperstown.
Jenn: Lidocaine and novacaine are often used interchangebly.
So McNamee suddenly became sleazy after this event? These allegations may well go to his character, but this is exactly the same character that Roger liked enough at Toronto to insist on his coming with him from the Jays to the Yankees.
Couldn’t you just as easily make the allegation that someone who allegedly committed this act, is just the sort of person who might be injecting Roger?
And if you really want to defend Roger behind the “maybe Saint Roger didn’t know what the terrible nasty (alleged) rapist was doing” argument – grow up. Roger has a responsibility to know what is going on with his own body – if he wants to let anyone who isn’t a doctor give him injections in any case, he bares the responsibility for what did go into his body.
I also love the outrage from you Pete – he lied to the Press – good grief, get him in a court where I can convict him. Do you really want to tell me that Roger has never ever lied to the Press? Do we even need to go back more than 48 hours to test that claim?
Mitchell= Federal Govt. Murray Jr….Why isnt Pettite going to testify????? Maybe he thinks “the Texas Con Man “(RIP Will) isnt worth Jail time also,..It sounds like you really did thorough background check on this supposed cop who said he lied and that the case was dropped??? 5 w’s Murray lite
Just got home, was reading the blog all day at work…
Re: Pete’s post above – This guy McNamee sounds like a real slime.
When cops deal with bad guys, they often have to rely on the testimony of other bad guys, because that’s all that they have. But when you’re George Mitchell, and you’re naming one of the biggest names in sports history, you better come up with something/someone better. Especially when there’s NO hard evidence. And when other people, like Mike Boddicker as mentioned in one of the responses above, personally vouches for Clemens, it raises the bar.
Again, I’m not saying that Roger is innocent. Just that one needs to be fair, and present real evidence, not hearsay from someone as morally compromised as McNamee.
I think anyone of us would want to be treated that way.
Yeah, next thing we know, Pettitte will say McNamee never gave HGH. Oh wait.
The criminal justice system is built on the evidence provided by people far worse than McNamee. Stop being so naive, Peter.
Jim PA
Try Turning Stone Casino/Hotel. It’s about an hour from Cooperstown and casinos usually have good rates.
Very nice thought about Mcnamee putting steroids in Clemens to keep his own job. I don’t think the other criminal cases affect this issue.
wow, he said it was a life saving act, not that is something…
Neil/whoa –
sleazy or not, McNamee has shown repeatedly that he is willing and capable of lying (incl. lying to police).
If the ONLY evidence against Clemens is the testimony of a person who has shown this trait, and the circumstances in which he gave the testimony are possibly questionable, why is it so hard to consider that Clemens may be in the right?
How can people be so adament that Clemens is guilty and not have a clear bias or pre-existing hatred for the guy?
That’s all.
Whoa – you’ve made some good points in the past, but I have to disagree with you here.
The criminal justice system is built on prosecutors and cops getting convictions, not right and wrong.
How often have we read of someone in jail being released based on DNA technology or a re-examination of the evidence? More than once or twice. Here on Long Island, some poor guy was just released from jail after being falsely convicted of killing his parents – and losing 17 YEARS of his life behind bars. Re-examination of the evidence showed that numerous leads on other suspects, that would have exonerated this man, were not pursued. The local district attorney just announced that he would not re-prosecute the case. How does this guy get his life back?
With Roger, we’re not talking about jail time, “just” his name. But it points out that one should have hard evidence before rushing to judgement.
The one constant still glares brightly. The entire fiasco has been done during Selig’s watch and he hides like a rodent behind a wall. 2009 can’t get here soon enough so he can sneak away like the absolute creampuff he is.
Mike and the Mad Dog were on this afternoon, seemingly scratching their heads as to:
-why did McNamee call Clemens — for Roger to help his son despite how McNamee’s actions impacted Clemens?
-why did McNamee keep talking about his son/how Roger was his paternal role model?
-why didn’t Roger just tell him directly to tell the truth?
All these questions are neatly answered by the scenario suggested by Roger’s lawsuit: someone on Mitchell’s team coerced McNamee (under threat of jail) to give up Roger, even if it wasn’t true and despite no other evidence.
Roger kept saying he wanted someone to tell the truth.
McNamee kept asking Roger “what do you want ME to do?”
It all makes sense if he was appealing to Roger’s humanity: “Roger, do you want me to tell the truth even if it sends me to jail and causes me to be away from my sick son until he’s dead?”
Roger never brought himself to ask McNamee to tell the truth.
I don’t know if the above scenario is true, but it’s increasingly looking like the most logical explanation to a lot of question marks to me.
Yazman, I think that is WAY off. WAAYYYY off. but who knows.
“Jennifer – Save Phil Hughes!” – try googling LIDOCAINE instead of LITOCAINE, since the word you are googling is a misspelling
also, has anyone else had trouble getting the mobile version to work the last few weeks? I am on Verizon mobile (LG 8600 phone) and I can’t get the mobile version by typing http://yankees.lhblogs.com/ into my mobile browser – only the regular version which is impossible to navigate on the phone…
Wish I had the mobile version. My problem is that it takes more than 90 minutes for my posts to even show up.
Juice – mobile version has been working fine for me. I’ve had some issues with the regular version but that’s it.
Boston Dave/Joe from Long Island,
Here’s why I believe McNamee:
1) Pettitte corroborated a central portion of his allegations, which makes McNamee very credible, imo, in this instance.
2) McNamee had every reason to tell the truth to federal investigators, and through them Mitchell: It was the only way he was going to stay out of jail. To do that he had to betray someone who was very important to his career. You could hear that in his words and his voice in the recorded phone conversation that Clemens’s atty played yesterday. I believe that tape enhances McNamee’s credibility.
3) In that conversation, there was a very important omission in Clemens’s words to McNamee.
Why didn’t Clemens say to McNamee: “How could you not tell me that you gave Pettitte HGH? I introduced you to him and I had a right to know!”
4) Clemens told Wallace that if he had known that McNamee had talked to Mitchell, he would have talked to him as well. Yet in today’s Daily News it is reported that Clemens did know because he (and Pettitte) had sent PIs to speak to McNamee before the report was released.
Anyone going to Cooperstown must stop at Brooks’ Bar-B-Q on Rt 7 in Oneonta. It’s just a few miles west of the road heading up to Cooperstown. The place has been in business since 1961. My family has enjoyed it since the 60′s. Here’s their website.
http://www.brooksbbq.com/index.php
I promise you, if it’s not the best bbq’d chicken you’ve ever had, then I’ll let Roger stick a needle in my bum.
Yazman, I agree. Mike and the Mad Dog were unbelievably stupid in their analysis of this situation. I can’t believe they get paid to do what they do. I can’t believe i listened as long as I did.
Wiggum fan, I agree that your scenario is possible, but I think we also must consider that Clemens understood he was being injected with PEDS at times but it was never openly discussed so as to not ruin plausible deniability. B12 wink wink, nudge nudge.
McNamee mentioned a six-figure offer to tell his version of the developements and Roger never flinched during the telephone conversation probably knowing it was straight BS from the quintessential liar.
If McNamee’s lawyer believed him, then he can put to rest the thought of working pro bono.
whoa -
the only one of those 4 that I think is valid is #1. Pettitte’s admission gives some credibility to McNamee. However McNamee himself said he isnt surprised that Clemens didnt know about Andy. That said, you have to view the two as separate.
McNamee flat out told Clemens’ attorneys that he was somewhat coerced to specifically give up Clemens. There seems to be more to this story.
Bottom line, there is so little evidence against Clemens that anybody who is ‘convinced’ or ‘certain’ or even ‘strongly believes’ is a fool.
There just isnt enough to vilify Clemens the way its being done.
whoa –
from the lawsuit:
“According to McNamee, he originally made his allegations to authorities after being threatened with criminal prosecution if he did not implicate Clemens.”
That is very disturbing if true.
jay destro – you do understand what the word conspiracy means two or more people have conspired to do something, right? Actually, the question posed to Peter by his friend was a lone nut theory and not all that far fetched.
Boston Dave,
Let’s say Clemens didn’t know about Andy. Why wasn’t (as I said) Clemens pissed about that and why didn’t he confront McNamee about it? Maybe because he took PEDs and just assumed that Pettitte did too.
I think it’s fair to characterize the prospect of jail time if you don’t cooperate with federal investigators as coercion. I don’t see anything extraordinary about that.
Look, if you want to call me a fool, go ahead. I can take it, and I’ll wear it as a badge of honor.
But let’s not forget that this story isn’t operating in a vacuum. It’s not like Clemens was one of the only people in MLB to take PEDs. To the contrary, it’s likely that over (or at least close to) 50% of the players took them at one time or another. So the idea that Clemens took them, given the direct testimony of McNamee and the way Clemens has acted, is not particularly hard to believe.
Boston Dave,
I’m a lawyer. Allegations in a complaint are not in and of themselves evidence. In this instance, I view the lawsuit and the complaint as a public relations gambit.
I believe that the case will be dropped before it goes to a jury.
whoa – i dont know where you’re getting the 50%. It may be accurate, maybe not. Seems like you are very good at pulling numbers and assumptions out of thin air.
if you cant see a problem with prosecutors saying “give us clemens or you’re going to jail” when mcnamee didnt initially mention clemens, then i pray you arent a defense attorney.
whoa – the allegations in contest are supposedly taken from a recorded meeting between Clemens’ attorneys and McNamee.
“Let’s say Clemens didn’t know about Andy. Why wasn’t (as I said) Clemens pissed about that and why didn’t he confront McNamee about it? Maybe because he took PEDs and just assumed that Pettitte did too.”
Or maybe because Pettitte is an adult and not one of Clemens kids. What he chose to put in his body is his business.
Boston Dave
Where is your evidence that the Federal government “coerced” McNamee in the manner you have set out there? Or is you speculating from comment in defense of Roger acceptable, but anyone else doing so in harm of Roger is unacceptable?
Can you provide a justification for why the Feds would decide to harm Clemens in this manner? Based on what has become public you seem to be suggesting that the US Government decided to concoct a conspiracy against Clemens to what purpose? Or am I to believe that the Federal Government is secretly a Red Sox supporting organization, and the attempt to discredit Rogers career is a suitable response to Roger eventually ending up in the Bronx?
In response to your assertion, I can state with 100% certainty that before the Mitchell Report, and before Rogers response, particularly over the last 48 hours that I had absolutely no bias against him, further I can guarantee you 100% that I have no hatred for any individual walking the face of this earth.
The reason I can assign so much doubt to Clemens is the credibility of the evidence provided – unlike you I don’t feel particularly cheapened by putting trust in the evidence of a liar. If I have ever told a lie, am I incapable of ever telling the truth?
Whether you want to acknowledge this or not, Roger has just as strong a history of lying as any other individual involved in this sordid story – he stated that he left Boston so he could pitch closer to his Texas home… in Toronto… he lied to MLB when he created his “illegal” side agreement supporting his trade out of Toronto… he will have lied countless times to press and teammates about injuries… he lied when he said he was retiring from baseball, before he signed with the Astros and cost the Yankees compensation… he lied less than 48 hours ago many times – among them – he had no idea what might be included in the Mitchell Report, and, he doesn’t give a I rat’s ass about the HoF…the list can go on and on – he is not an individual that has any particularly strong track record of telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth – so if you want to place your faith in one liar over the other fine, but we don’t need to agree with you on which liar may be more convincing.
whoa:
as an attorney, particularly if you’re a litigator, you know that credibility is key. And quite often it’s a balancing act. McNamee being accurate with respect to Pettitte inures in favor of his truthfulness. Lying to police in the Florida case and the press in 2001 (see the Heyman article from last night’s thread) cut the opposite way. Frankly, the pressure from the feds is a toss-up without more information. If it was a straight choirboy setup – tell us the truth or else, we don’t care if you incriminate anyone or no one, then he has incentive to be truthful. If the feds handed him to Mitchell who said, give me a big name or else, then he had incentive to give up a big name. All things considered, there is a lot to be considered.
Neil,
a) I said “That is very disturbing if true.” that’s… IF
b) everything you said only confirms what I’ve been trying to say… there’s just not enough evidence to be certain either way. So what kind of person, faced with uncertainty and virtually no evidence, chooses to go with guilty until proven innocent rather than innocent until proven guilty?
just my opinion, but I say the person who does that.. is either a fool, has some sort of bias, or is just a scumbag of a human being. if you are one of the people that feels certain clemens is guilty, then pick a, b, or c… because you are absolutely one of those.
p.s. Neil –
Clemens’ attorneys supposedly recorded McNamee saying he was coerced to implicate Clemens. That’s the gist of McNamee’s recorded words. I imagine if this comes to fruition, that will be confirmed or not. McNamee’s attorney supposedly said that McNamee was lying when he said those things. If he wasn’t lying, I find it disturbing and pretty damaging for the Mitchell report. Is that hard to believe?
whoa – January 8th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
You are a lawyer??? I’m sorry, but this is a really weak post. #4 is the only one with some grit. Not all the facts are out, but one article I read said that Mitchell’s people did not fully disclose what they ‘had’ on Roger. The union was VERY against players meeting with Mitchell. Of all the current and past players who could be involved, how many met Mitchell? 3? Ever other lawyer on this blog has said it would have been nuts for anyone to meet with Mitchell unless full and specific allegations had been laid out.
As far as #1 goes: Are you telling me that if you have a witness that makes 3 true statements, then all other statements he makes are thereby true? Are you kidding? A great liar/con man tells the truth as much as possible to give weight to his lie, otherwise he has no credibility. Furthermore, McNamee is documented to have lied to the police and in multiple statements he has made to the press. You would like this guy to be YOUR prime witness on the stand? You would be happy to let opposing counsel grill this guy under oath?
‘McNamee had every reason to tell the truth to federal investigators, and through them Mitchell: It was the only way he was going to stay out of jail.’
This is pure supposition on your part. How do you know that they didn’t assume Roger was using and therefore demanded McNamee ‘give them’ Roger? It’s not an issue of truth or lies. McNamee is an ex cop, quasi con man (with a PhD) and documented liar. His ONLY goal was to stay out of prison and save his ass. Are you telling me as a lawyer, you have never heard of an incidence of someone being badgered into telling ‘a little lie’?
‘Why didn’t Clemens say to McNamee: “How could you not tell me that you gave Pettitte HGH? I introduced you to him and I had a right to know!‒
Are you nuts? If someone introduces you to a girl, they are then ENTITLED to know intimate details of your relationship? Have you ever made this demand on someone you know? He had a RIGHT TO KNOW??? (Are you nuts?)
This is not to say Roger is innocent. I have no idea. But if you used those four statements in court, opposing counsel would cream you.
Boston Dave
I think I will go with (a) – better to be a fool than an arrogant, pompous ass wouldn’t you say?
I don’t know if you got bored reading my post because it doesn’t support your position, but I set out for you why I had reached my opinion:
- the evidence provided in the Mitchell Report
- the independent corroboration of McNamee’s evidence by other named parties in the Mitchell Report
- Clemens first response on 60 Minutes
- Clemens behavior in trying to trap McNamee
- the quality of Clemens responses during his press conference
Again, that doesn’t fit with your version of the evidence – again just my opinion (to use your humbling term), but to leap from that to your choices makes me wonder – are you (a) 5, (b) 7 or (c) 12 years old?
ps Boston Dave
Having made the world’s media sit through an utterly pointless 17 minute phone call, you are comfortable with the view that Clemens’ attorney’s have a taped confession from McNamee that he was coerced by the Feds, but have chosen not to share that with us yet?
Again, what possible purpose would the Feds have to concoct the conspiracy against Clemens that supports this position?
And apologies for the a, b, c choices above, I responded in anger to your post – I shouldn’t complain about your tactics, then repeat them – so I will go with (a) for myself as well on that question.
Neil,
I guess I have done much more research on this matter than you have and since its bedtime I don’t have the time to educate you. My best advice would be to go through the posts in yesterdays blogs and educate yourself.
If you truly feel that there is enough evidence to consider Clemens guilty, then I really don’t know what to say. I am fairly certain that most attorneys would beg to differ.
and to answer your question, I am choice “a”.
so apparently, to quote Jeff Foxworthy…. you are NOT smarter than a first grader.
ok Neil, I apologize as well… but seriously, there were some very good posts by some intelligent people, many of them lawyers, in yesterday’s blogs. Some of these will answer the questions you posted. I guess we can agree to disagree. I am not going to yield in my stance that there is a chance Clemens is telling the truth.
nite.
Keep it simple, people: What motive did McNamee have to falsely claim that Clemens took steroids? None. It has ruined his relationship with Clemens and it has ruined his career. Why would he lie?
In contrast, Clemens has every reason to lie and deny steriods use.
I don’t know if you got bored reading my post because it doesn’t support your position, but I set out for you why I had reached my opinion:
- the evidence provided in the Mitchell Report
- the independent corroboration of McNamee’s evidence by other named parties in the Mitchell Report
- Clemens first response on 60 Minutes
- Clemens behavior in trying to trap McNamee
- the quality of Clemens responses during his press conference
————————————————
1) There is NO evidence against Roger. It’s HeSaid-Hesaid
2) There is NO corroboration on McNamees statements against Roger
3) His response on 60 minutes? You mean he wasn’t as good as DiNero or as literate as Mike Wallace? IF IF IF Roger is innocent, he is just one super pissed and super betrayed man. You can judge his responses in such a way that he seems guilty to you?
4) His behavior trying to trap McNamee? You mean with counsel surrounding him, coaching him, trying to say nothing wrong and not tamper, with McNamee on the other end, trying to do the same thing? You can decern something meaning out of that mess?
5) The QUALITY of his responses? What do you want, song and tap dance. This is a VERY pissed off guy fighting for his 24 year career. You want him to be cool? Charming? Funny? What? This is basically a great pitcher who is also a red-neck Texan. This is a man who knows that ‘the higher up the flagpole you are, the more your butt shows’. Just what kind of performance to you expect?
You must be very gifted to be able to know so much based on Rogers collective ‘performances’.
You have done more research… any evidence to back that up BD, given that evidence seems so important to you? Or are you making bold assumptions based on the available information – no you don’t do that BD do you, you want hard evidence before you convict people right?
You think most attorneys would beg to differ? I think most attorneys would let the paymaster decide what their opinion is, it is after all why every guilty man has representation – doesn’t McNamee have an attorney after all?
Again, you want to presume innocence, I have let the weight of the evidence presented to me persuade me otherwise. I am amused by your belief that what is good for the goose isn’t good for the gander, but given your enjoyment of the Fox Network’s intellectual output, perhaps I shouldn’t be surprised.
I had the same thought yesterday that McNamee could have injected Clemens with steroids and Clemens wouldn’t of known better. Since Clemens never supplied the B12 it could be easy for McNamee to inject him with something other than then B12 and the other drug he was taking.
OYF
Come on – that is just as liberal an interpretation of the “facts” as my position, which you claim to find objectionable – either both of our positions are objectionable, or both are opinions based on our own interpretation of what has been made public to date.
There is no evidence against Clemens? That is just plain wrong as a statement of fact – you may not approve of the quality of evidence, you may not believe that this evidence is true, or meets a reasonable standard, but to state that there is no ‘evidence’ is just wrong.
You are correct that there is no independent corroboration of the evidence against Clemens to date, but you are choosing to attack the source of the evidence as a key element of your claim that there is no evidence. That claim is directly undermined by Pettitte’s decision to corroborate what McNamee claimed – again McNamee’s claims against Pettitte were uncorroborated evidence by your standard – except for the rather inconvenient element that his claims were actually true.
You think that I shouldn’t be surprised by the quality of Clemens performance in the Wallace interview. My response to that would be that Roger had at least 2 weeks to prepare, he chose the interviewer, he chose the format, he chose the location – and yet despite his experience of dealing with the media for 24 years he gave nonsense answers (why don’t I have an ear growing out of my forehead) and was absolutely unwilling to have a rational discussion about the claims made against him – remember Mike Wallace did not surprise him on his doorstep with these claims.
You have chosen to interpret Clemens behavior on the phone call in one particular light – you say that his team were there to ensure that he did not tamper, nor say anything wrong – so why did Roger not open the call by letting McNamee know that he had his legal team there, and that the call was being recorded? I would put a question to you on this – if McNamee had said – ‘c’mon Roger you know what I injected, we discussed this as part of our training regime’ – do you think Roger’s team would have been so quick to share the call’s content?
In response to your final point on his performance in front of the world’s media yesterday, it would repeat many of the points raised / answered above, but again, yes, whether you would like to believe this or not, I would expect Roger to be able to be a credible responder in front of a group of reporters. I certainly wouldn’t expect him to openly lie would you? Roger Clemens doesn’t give a “rat’s ass” about the HoF – that is as blunt a lie as we have been told in the last 48 hours don’t you think?
Thats just the point. I do NOT interpret his behavior. My interpretation, or yours, has absolutely nothing to do with facts. Nothing. 5 million people can have 5 million interpretations. Yours, like mine, has ZERO value.
What evidence is there? The only thing I have seen is McNamees statement. Clemens denies it. Right now, legally it’s 50/50.
If I tell you my best friend shoots heroine, is it true? Because I said it? He is my best friend. I should know. Why would I lie about my best friend? Do you consider this concrete evidence?
As I’ve said, I don’t know if Roger is guilty or innocent. If he’s guilty, he’s even dumber then I ever expected, because he will be hated forever.
My point is anyone who has an ‘informed’ opinion is wrong. We can guess, but there is not enough evidence either way to make an informed opinion.
Rogers supporters are hoping he’s innocent.
Rogers haters are INSISTING he’s guilty.
I know nobody is going to read this at this point in time (has everybody made up their minds for sure now on Brian McNamee?), but Peter Abraham, you of all people should be aware that the AP story you linked to is an amalgam of the Rusty Hardin-generated version of the 2001 “alleged rape case” (as he refers to it).
I suggest you and all the LoHud bloggers here read the ORIGINAL STORY published October 14, 2001 (and reprinted in the Post by George King and Clemente Lisi on Mitchell Report Day, December 13, 2007 as seen at http://www.nypost.com/seven/12.....612457.htm )
Differences in the text of the story: The MANAGER of the hotel said ” ‘it LOOKED LIKE he was having sex with a woman’ in a hotel swimming pool”; “the manager saw McNamee and the woman in a sexual position in about 3½ feet of water” [and I'm sure he allowed for distortions due to the refractive index of that depth of water!].
There’s more, of course. Ultimately, McNamee was NOT charged in the case, rendering him technically “cleared of wrongdoing” as his lawyer contended at the time.
Not in the court of public opinion, I guess. Roger Clemens and Brian McNamee have this in common, too.