Pages

July 6, 2011

United States vs. William R. Clemens Begins Today

Jury selection in the case of United States vs. William R. Clemens begins today in Washington, DC. Opening statements are expected early next week.

Fat Billy is charged with six felony counts (Obstruction of Congress, Perjury, False Statements) for telling (under oath) a House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in February 2008 that he had never used performance-enhancing drugs during his baseball career.

Jim Litke, Associated Press:
After being implicated in MLB's Mitchell Report, Clemens could have denied using performance-enhancers in a forum of his own choosing and quietly slipped into retirement while the debated raged on ...

Instead, Clemens begged Congress to make a federal case out of it. ...

"Somebody is trying to break my spirit in this room," Clemens said during testimony that February day three years ago, refusing to so much as glance at Brian McNamee, his former trainer and principal accuser. "And they're not going to break my spirit." ...

McNamee's version of their decade together has already made a sizable dent in his former employer's wallet, mostly to cover lawyer Rusty Hardin's legal fees, which could charitably be described as throwing good money after bad.

Under Hardin's counsel, Clemens played a secretly recorded phone conversation for reporters in which he came off sounding like a budding Mafioso, then stormed out of his own hastily arranged news conference because he didn't like the line of questioning. Then there was Hardin's veiled threat against federal agent and investigator Jeff Novitzky -- "If he ever messes with Roger, Roger will eat his lunch." And just for good measure, a defamation lawsuit against McNamee that was effectively laughed out of court. ...

McNamee has come off as neither a sympathetic figure nor a trustworthy one ... [but his story] has never changed.

"I told the investigators I injected three people -- two of whom I know confirmed my account," he said then, referring to Clemens' teammates, Pettitte and Chuck Knoblauch. "The third is sitting at this table."
T.J. Quinn, ESPN:
During a pre-trial hearing in U.S. District Court on Tuesday, defense attorney Rusty Hardin said Clemens' longtime personal trainer, Brian McNamee, was worried that a rape investigation involving him would lead the Yankees to fire him as their strength coach. Their argument is that [in 2001] McNamee took syringes and gauze pads with Clemens' DNA and tainted it with performance-enhancing drugs with the intention of blackmailing Clemens into giving him a job. ...

Prosecutors argued that telling the jury that McNamee was the subject of a rape investigation would be prejudicial, and U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton said he was inclined to agree, although he did not issue a ruling. ...

It also was established on Tuesday that Clemens "is not a scholar of linguistics."

That point was put forward by one of his attorneys, Michael Attanasio, to make the case that when his client famously said Andy Pettitte "misremembered" a conversation about human growth hormone, he actually meant that he "misheard," ...

Clemens stared ahead without taking notes like he did at previous proceedings and walked so quickly out of the courthouse, surrounded by media, that his attorney called for him to slow down.
Juliet Macur, Times:
"In 1999 or 2000, I had a conversation with Roger Clemens in which Roger told me that he had taken human growth hormone," [Andy] Pettitte said in [his] affidavit, a potentially pivotal declaration if spoken before a jury.

"Everybody knows that Andy's a goody-two-shoes that will have a big impact on the jury," said Alan M. Dershowitz, a Harvard law professor and celebrity lawyer. "He has no motives to lie, no conceivable reason to testify against his best friend. So, if I'm a defense attorney, I would try to get him off the stand as soon as possible to minimize his impact." ...

Peter Keane, a professor at Golden Gate University School of Law, said Pettitte would be seen by the jury "as a very reluctant witness who just can't lie under oath, even for a close friend ... I think Clemens is in big trouble."

6 comments:

  1. i find it interesting that no one has bothered to comment on the Clements post... is it because peoples (like me) eyes glaze over when more talk of steroids in baseball comes up... or because everyone (like me) pretty much knows he is guilty and are just waiting for the verdict?

    in a similar vein... there were no comments on the Schadenfreude on Jeter... every other Schadenfreude seems to generate a lot of (great) comments... does Jeter get a pass because although a MFY, he is (in my book) the "worthy adversary" (like Rivera)?

    It has been long enough that I don't think you are going to get any comments...

    Allan - i respect your insight and would appreciate your thoughts...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, the Clemens post doesn't really say anything. It's a note saying "this is starting". So what can you say to that? And for me, it's not about steroids at all. It's about enjoying Clemens's turmoil and how his stupidity makes everything worse for him.

    The Jeter post was fairly minor as far as Schadenfreude posts go. ... I don't think he gets a pass. ... Also, I'm guessing that the Schadenfreude posts that get comments are the ones after the Red Sox beat them. But I have not done a study.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I will comment. I can understand people simply enjoying watching Clemens squirm. But I am one that honestly, deep down doesn't care if he lied to Congress. I can't think of anyone who deserves less respect than people in power (or at least those that are supposedly in power) who use that people to screw over those they're supposed to be serving. When Clemens testifies, there will be tons of worthless trash in that room, and I'm not talkikng about Clemens or that weird syringe baggy evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I can't think of anyone who deserves less respect than people in power (or at least those that are supposedly in power) who use that people to screw over those they're supposed to be serving. ... Not that I'm bitter or anything.

    Bitter?

    Truthful is more like it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Darn. For such a short statement, I sure made a lot of typos. Well, you got my gist.

    ReplyDelete