Clemens files defamation lawsuit against ex-trainer McNamee
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Starting Wide Receiver
- Posts: 19150
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:48 pm
- Location: Crystal, MN
- x 114
- Contact:
Clemens files defamation lawsuit against ex-trainer McNamee
Sure, now that there is proof, or at least witnesses, he is filing a suit. Just admit you took them, you coward.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3184646
Josh
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3184646
Josh
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." #SKOL2018
-
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5692
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 5:56 am
- x 16
-
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5063
- Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 3:12 pm
- Location: Park Rapids, MN
-
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 6652
- Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:28 pm
- x 21
I haven't seen any proof that Clemens used steroids. There is a distinction between proof and an allegation. Right now Brian McNamee has made an allegation that he injected Clemens with steroids but that isn't proof and it hasn't been tested under cross-examination in a court of law (and it probably never will be since the Feds are not going to indict Clemens for his alleged use of steroids).
At this point I'm much more inclined to believe McNamee over Clemens. McNamee made his allegation when he was caught up in a federal investigation and was under the express threat of being prosecuted for perjury by the Feds. But for the time being this really is just one man's word against another. The defamation lawsuit against McNamee is a PR stunt. Anyone can file a civil lawsuit. The fact that his lawsuit does not include George Mitchell and MLB tells you all you need to know about the merits of that action.
What stuck me most in his 60 Minutes interview was that his main point seemed to be that he is entitled to the benefit of the doubt because of who he is. Good luck with that one Rog. The low point was when Mike Wallace asked him if he would take a lie detector test. Clemens responded almost immediately with a pat answer of "some people say they are no good and some people say they are" or something like that. He never said he would or he wouldn't. It was a very artful way of dodging the question and it was obvious that he and his attorney had prepped for it. Memo to Clemens: when you get a question like that try to pause a little so it at least appears that you are responding contemporaneously instead of providing a canned answer that you cooked up with your attorney.
Mike Wallace has a rep for going for the throat but he sure didn't do that with his interview of Clemens. There were several answers (like the lie detector test) that he never pounced on and did a follow-up to. It was like Clemens threw him a series of hanging curveballs down the center of the plate and Wallace just stood there, took them for the third strike and walked back to the dugout.
At this point I'm much more inclined to believe McNamee over Clemens. McNamee made his allegation when he was caught up in a federal investigation and was under the express threat of being prosecuted for perjury by the Feds. But for the time being this really is just one man's word against another. The defamation lawsuit against McNamee is a PR stunt. Anyone can file a civil lawsuit. The fact that his lawsuit does not include George Mitchell and MLB tells you all you need to know about the merits of that action.
What stuck me most in his 60 Minutes interview was that his main point seemed to be that he is entitled to the benefit of the doubt because of who he is. Good luck with that one Rog. The low point was when Mike Wallace asked him if he would take a lie detector test. Clemens responded almost immediately with a pat answer of "some people say they are no good and some people say they are" or something like that. He never said he would or he wouldn't. It was a very artful way of dodging the question and it was obvious that he and his attorney had prepped for it. Memo to Clemens: when you get a question like that try to pause a little so it at least appears that you are responding contemporaneously instead of providing a canned answer that you cooked up with your attorney.
Mike Wallace has a rep for going for the throat but he sure didn't do that with his interview of Clemens. There were several answers (like the lie detector test) that he never pounced on and did a follow-up to. It was like Clemens threw him a series of hanging curveballs down the center of the plate and Wallace just stood there, took them for the third strike and walked back to the dugout.
I've heard that Wallace is actually friends with Clemens. Going into the interview the talk radio sports stations were discussing how they know each other outside of a professional type relationship and there is no way Wallace was expected to ask him anything.
Also being discussed that a large part of this was to keep him from having to testify in front of congress. Does this somewhere allow him to refuse that and still save face? Is he unable to testify because of the lawsuit? Not sure how that works.
Also being discussed that a large part of this was to keep him from having to testify in front of congress. Does this somewhere allow him to refuse that and still save face? Is he unable to testify because of the lawsuit? Not sure how that works.
For the most part I agree with X. I didn't see the interview.
Lie detectors are worthless these days, one side can find a examiner to pass the guy the other can find one to fail him. Anyone without some interest in the outcome would be left with .
I don't care at this point. If the media wasn't all over this nobody else would probably care much either. As it stands it was a bunch of players playing against others and they were all doped up... probably a wash and the best doped players still ended up with the best records in their sports. This is what happens when it is worth millions, lottery winning bucks, to play a game... they will all reach the level of pro rassling in time.
Lie detectors are worthless these days, one side can find a examiner to pass the guy the other can find one to fail him. Anyone without some interest in the outcome would be left with .
I don't care at this point. If the media wasn't all over this nobody else would probably care much either. As it stands it was a bunch of players playing against others and they were all doped up... probably a wash and the best doped players still ended up with the best records in their sports. This is what happens when it is worth millions, lottery winning bucks, to play a game... they will all reach the level of pro rassling in time.
I'm not sure I believe in the wavy line machine either. Didn't Aldrich Ames beat his lie detector test several times?John wrote: Lie detectors are worthless these days, one side can find a examiner to pass the guy the other can find one to fail him. Anyone without some interest in the outcome would be left with .
Anyone see the first episode of The Wire last night? Now there was a lie detector machine that was really effective.
-
- Starting Wide Receiver
- Posts: 19150
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:48 pm
- Location: Crystal, MN
- x 114
- Contact:
John wrote:As it stands it was a bunch of players playing against others and they were all doped up... probably a wash and the best doped players still ended up with the best records in their sports. .
You are probably right, John, but I have a huge problem with them all coming out with these press conferences and vehimitely denying the allegations, and they have found that some players who denied it actually did take steroids (Rafael Palmero I think was the one a few years back).
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." #SKOL2018
Faster pitch + faster swing = more force = more home runs.John wrote:As it stands it was a bunch of players playing against others and they were all doped up... probably a wash and the best doped players still ended up with the best records in their sports. .
We come from the land of the ice and snow ....