Roger Clemens Acquitted

[haha]

The travesty that was Clemens trial for lying to the government is over and Clemens found not guilty.

I guess our govt was tired of wasting money in all its tried and true ways, and thought they might like to try something new.

Ha

 

[eytonxav]

We'll the gummit ain't much good for anything other than the frivalous.

Anyway, regardless of this verdict, I suspect Clemens will not make it in to the Hall anytime soon.

 

[W2R]

I don't follow professional sports, so actually I had no idea who Roger Clemens was. I Googled him, found out that he is (or was?) a baseball player, and read a few articles about the trial. From what I read, I gather justice was served.

 

[Texas Proud]

We'll the gummit ain't much good for anything other than the frivalous.

Anyway, regardless of this verdict, I suspect Clemens will not make it in to the Hall anytime soon.

I do not think he will get in on his first try.... but he will get in sooner rather than later... I say within 5 years...

 

[RunningBum]

I don't follow professional sports, so actually I had no idea who Roger Clemens was. I Googled him, found out that he is (or was?) a baseball player, and read a few articles about the trial. From what I read, I gather justice was served.

Depends on what you call justice. I think he probably took steroids and/or other performance enhancing drugs. I'm not sure baseball even had rules against it during most of his playing career. I don't think congress should have gotten involved in the first place. But if he was doing them, he lied to congress about it, which is pretty serious. But, the case against him was weak with a pretty questionable witness testifying against him, and I don't think they should've wasted the time and money to go after him with such a poor case. Same story with Barry Bonds.

 

[eytonxav]

To get in the hall, it requires 75% of the vote. I don't think Mark McQuire was ever named in the Mitchell report, but IIRC he still hasn't made it after numerous tries. Sosa and Bonds will also be on the ballot this time around. It will be interesting to see what happens.

Personally, I feel their records are tainted and desipte how great they were as ball players, it tends to diminish the accomplishment of those that got there legally (and I mean the players of yesteryear).

 

[Texas Proud]

Depends on what you call justice. I think he probably took steroids and/or other performance enhancing drugs. I'm not sure baseball even had rules against it during most of his playing career. I don't think congress should have gotten involved in the first place. But if he was doing them, he lied to congress about it, which is pretty serious. But, the case against him was weak with a pretty questionable witness testifying against him, and I don't think they should've wasted the time and money to go after him with such a poor case. Same story with Barry Bonds.

I think there is more evidence that Bonds took steroids than Clements... heck, just looking at Bonds is enough evidence...

Agree that congress should have not gotten involved.... but I also think that if you testify under oath you should be very careful if you tell a lie...

The evidence against Clements is very weak IMO.... I still tend to think he did not take them, but not by a lot... if there were more or stronger evidence I would not hesitate to change my opinion...

 

[easysurfer]

I can practically hear the phone ringing now.

Lance Armstrong to Roger Clemmens: Roger, who's your lawyer?

 

[M Paquette]

Remember, he wasn't charged with using steroids. He was charged with obstructing and lying to Congress, a crime which is commonly found among Congresscritters themselves, as spending a morning watching CSPAN will reveal.

So, was the prosecution of the wanton crime of annoying Congresscritters worth the enormous cost, enough to cover almost 10% of the cost overrun on a F-22 Raptor?

 

[easysurfer]

To get in the hall, it requires 75% of the vote. I don't think Mark McQuire was ever named in the Mitchell report, but IIRC he still hasn't made it after numerous tries. Sosa and Bonds will also be on the ballot this time around. It will be interesting to see what happens.

Personally, I feel their records are tainted and desipte how great they were as ball players, it tends to diminish the accomplishment of those that got there legally (and I mean the players of yesteryear).

I was listening to this sports talk show this morning and the question came up, should he (and others like Bonds, McGwire, Sosa etc) be in the hall. One commentators view was to put them in, but to tell the story. The story of the steriod era. For example, a hall of fame plaque would read something like: Sammy Sosa, lead the Cubs with all time team home runs, (even more than Mr. Cub, Ernie Banks). Sosa had over 60 home runs in two seasons, but was suspected being scamin' Sammy Sosa instead of slamin' Sammy Sosa.

 

[Koolau]

As Ray Donovan so famously asked after his acquittal on fraud (et. Al.) charges: "Which office do I go to to get my reputation back?" Had this been me (or most of us on this forum) we would also be asking "Where do I go to get my money back?" Even if you "win" , you lose. I've seen estimates that Clemens spent $3,000,000 on his defense. Since the gummint has all the power, I think they should pay when they lose (loser pays). In fact, in many cases, "criminals" convicted often have to pay costs as well as their own defense costs. Maybe it's just me, but it seems kind of unfair (even if you are a "rich" athlete) that you have to spend a ton of money to fight a gummint with limitless funds (and the ability to "influence" witnesses with "get-out-of-jail-free" cards). I

 

[JOHNNIE36]

As Ray Donovan so famously asked after his acquittal on fraud (et. Al.) charges: "Which office do I go to to get my reputation back?" Had this been me (or most of us on this forum) we would also be asking "Where do I go to get my money back?" Even if you "win" , you lose. I've seen estimates that Clemens spent $3,000,000 on his defense. Since the gummint has all the power, I think they should pay when they lose (loser pays). In fact, in many cases, "criminals" convicted often have to pay costs as well as their own defense costs. Maybe it's just me, but it seems kind of unfair (even if you are a "rich" athlete) that you have to spend a ton of money to fight a gummint with limitless funds (and the ability to "influence" witnesses with "get-out-of-jail-free" cards). I

I agree 100%. You lose, you pay the fees.

 

[nun]

The way I see it Clemens is guilty of doping, but there simply wasn't enough evidence to prove it or that he lied to Congress. So the justice system worked well, but I have no respect for Clemens. The same goes for Lance Armstrong. I don't believe there's ever been a TdF winner who didn't dope, Lance was a great rider and he had a team that helped him dope better than anyone too.

 

[haha]

The way I see it Clemens is guilty of doping, but there simply wasn't enough evidence to prove it or that he lied to Congress. So the justice system worked well, but I have no respect for Clemens.

He told the congressmen that he did not use roids. The jury heard all the evidence that our government could come up with to try to convict him of lying to government-(ie. saying he did not use roids when he in fact did), and the jury decided that they did not have enough evidence to convict him on any counts of lying to government.

So what do you know that the jury did not know, to say that he is guilty of doping? The logic trail would suggest that the worst that can be said is "I don't know."

Seems to me we should drop all this dope consciousness. There is a lot of money involved, and a lot of pressure, and a lot of attitude. Why not accept that athletes dope, musicians take drugs, actors get body surgery, and everyone photoshops their photos. If we want non-doped baseball, we can go watch our kids or grandkids play T-ball. Once something is ruined, it's ruined. I no longer have much interest in sports, who wants to watch these often chemically created multimillionaires with terrible personalities mess around on the field or court? I still like sports bars, and Reno during some tournements, but it is basically over.

Ha

 

[nun]

So what do you know that the jury did not know, to say that he is guilty of doping? The logic trail would suggest that the worst that can be said is "I don't know."

I have the evidence of my eyes and the tail end of his career. I would not have convicted Clemens on the evidence I heard that was given in the courtroom, but that doesn't change my opinion that he doped to extend his career.

 

[marko]

While the country goes down the rat-hole with real problems, our esteemed distracted Congress/government spends millions and millions prosecuting such non-events...and then can't even get a conviction!!

John Edwards, Clemens...these clowns couldn't convict Charles Manson.

 

[MichaelB]

One positive thing about government - no matter what the complaint, we can always blame it.

I didn't follow the case and don't know the people involved, so my view is that our judicial system still works well and the burden of proof is a high hurdle that we appreciate much more when personally involved.

 

[easysurfer]

Lance Armstrong...

Lance Armstrong: Enough Is Enough, Won't Fight Doping Charges | wltx.com

I really don't know what to believe. If I was clean, I may have approached things the same way and say "enough is enough", take the titles back.

 

[mickeyd]

He's back...

Roger Clemens raved about all the fun he had pitching at age 50 and putting smiles on the faces of Sugar Land baseball fans.
Still, it wasn't enough to set his mind on a major league comeback - at least not yet.
''No,'' Clemens said. ''I've had success before at that level and other things. Again, it's a great deal of work and I'm not thinking that at this point.''
Pitching for the first time in five years, Clemens tossed 3 1-3 scoreless innings Saturday night for the Sugar Land Skeeters of the independent Atlantic League.

Roger Clemens back on the mound at age 50 - Yahoo! Sports

 

[growing_older]

I saw reports that he pitched reasonably well. Does he expect that becoming the oldest currently active professional baseball player and pitching like kids half his age will improve his case that he didn't use performance enhancing drugs?

 

[easysurfer]

I saw reports that he pitched reasonably well. Does he expect that becoming the oldest currently active professional baseball player and pitching like kids half his age will improve his case that he didn't use performance enhancing drugs?

One theory I heard is that if he makes it back to the bigs this year, then the his hall of fame eligibility gets pushed back until he retires again. The thinking is maybe by that time the voters might see him differently.

I can picture Jaime Moyer warming up now to make another comeback to defend his oldest pitcher record . Just did a wiki search Clemens is actually a few months older than Moyer. So, if Clemens makes it to the bigs and wins, Moyer would have to wait for Clemens to retire again. First things first.

 

[Texas Proud]

I would think that LastRoes should spend some money to have him pitch... they would get enough attendance to pay his salary and he might actually win a game for them...

 

[ziggy29]

I saw reports that he pitched reasonably well. Does he expect that becoming the oldest currently active professional baseball player and pitching like kids half his age will improve his case that he didn't use performance enhancing drugs?

I think he's hoping to postpone his initial eligibility for the Hall of Fame, which would start after this season if he doesn't pitch in the majors. If he can pitch to even one batter in the majors this year (the Astros may be interested), his eligibility date would move back 5 years and perhaps he hopes this will mostly have blown over by then.