Roger Clemens Trial

Page 9 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
So lie and cheat yourself to the top and dont worry about it because joe public doesn't want to see money spent catching you.

I somehow doubt that, and if the real figures were released about how successful government agencies were, we'd see Armstrongs fans talking about a waste of money.

Maybe the loyal followers should be demanding Armstrong assist those investigating in every way possible to minimise the costs to joe public ;)

no one is above the law, even those who dope and cheat.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
eleven said:
Nothing, of course. It's just another example of an absurd federal investigation. You'll notice I didn't say anything about doping.



The Armstrong investigation was weak enough that they couldn't get it to trial.

And the Feds don't win 97% of cases. That's just absurd. The Department of Justice and Federal Prosecutors lose cases every day.



I disagree. Clemens was found not guilty because the key witness against him was a complete fraud and the primary evidence against him was stored in a beer can. With all the charges and complexities of the case the jury still turned a verdict in a day.
DOJ's conviction rate was 93% last year. Scoreboard!
http://www.justice.gov/usao/reading_room/reports/asr2010/10statrpt.pdf

All of the investigators and both prosecutors thought they Armstrong case was strong. They even drew up the charging papers. One guy ignored their advice and dropped it......for now

Clemens walked because of many years of work by his legal team kept key pieces of evidence out of the trial. You don't really think he was not guilty do you?
 
Apr 20, 2009
960
0
0
Race Radio said:
DOJ's conviction rate was 93% last year. Scoreboard!
http://www.justice.gov/usao/reading_room/reports/asr2010/10statrpt.pdf
So when you said they have a 97% conviction rate, you actually meant they have a 93% conviction rate? That's an odd board you use to keep score.


All of the investigators and both prosecutors thought they Armstrong case was strong. They even drew up the charging papers. One guy ignored their advice and dropped it......for now
Wait - DoJ prosecutors, people charged with prosecuting people, claim they had a strong case?

Shocking, I tell ya! Just shocking. How's that working out for 'em?

Clemens walked because of many years of work by his legal team kept key pieces of evidence out of the trial. You don't really think he was not guilty do you?
Guilty of what, exactly? Lying to congress?
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Apr 20, 2009
960
0
0
Race Radio said:
eleven said:
Race Radio said:
DOJ's conviction rate was 93% last year. Scoreboard!
http://www.justice.gov/usao/reading_room/reports/asr2010/10statrpt.pdf


4% is absurd for you? really? Face it, the Feds win far more then they lose. In the game of doping liars they are ahead on the count.
No, in doping cases they more often lose. They managed to get Bonds on one count and to zero effect on his livelyhood. They failed in the Clemens case. They failed in the Armstrong case. They succeeded in the Jones case.

And you claimed the Fed only lost 3% of it's cases when, in reality, it was more than twice that amount. But hey, you got to cheer "scoreboard!" like the kids in the adult pool.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
eleven said:
Race Radio said:
eleven said:
No, in doping cases they more often lose. They managed to get Bonds on one count and to zero effect on his livelyhood. They failed in the Clemens case. They failed in the Armstrong case. They succeeded in the Jones case.

And you claimed the Fed only lost 3% of it's cases when, in reality, it was more than twice that amount. But hey, you got to cheer "scoreboard!" like the kids in the adult pool.
Do you have a link that says the Feds lose over 50% of their doping cases, or did you just make that up?

Bonds is a convicted felon. His legacy is tainted forever and he is $10 million lighter. Most would not consider that winning.

You are under the misguided assumption that the Feds are done with Armstrong, they are not.

The fact is the Feds win cases. They especially win when it comes to dope. Clemens may have been acquitted but in the court of public opinion he lost huge.
 
Apr 20, 2009
960
0
0
Race Radio said:
eleven said:
Race Radio said:
Do you have a link that says the Feds lose over 50% of their doping cases, or did you just make that up?
Wait what? Making **** up? Speaking of making **** up, show me where I said the above. Don't worry, I'll wait for you to find me saying "The Feds lose over 50% of their doping cases"

Bonds is a convicted felon. His legacy is tainted forever and he is $10 million lighter. Most would not consider that winning.
He made 188M over the course of his career, 22M per year the last few seasons and he has a world series ring. He gave up 10M of that and will go down as one of the greatest players ever to take the field. I think we can consider that winning.

You are under the misguided assumption that the Feds are done with Armstrong, they are not.
This might be your fervent hope, but there is no evidence to support it.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
eleven said:
Race Radio said:
eleven said:
No, in doping cases they more often lose. They managed to get Bonds on one count and to zero effect on his livelyhood. They failed in the Clemens case. They failed in the Armstrong case. They succeeded in the Jones case.

And you claimed the Fed only lost 3% of it's cases when, in reality, it was more than twice that amount. But hey, you got to cheer "scoreboard!" like the kids in the adult pool.
don't expect either guy to be selling much. When's the last time Bond's appeared in any endorsement ad? That seems to be a huge impact on a potential Hall of Famer's after sport income, doesn't it?

Armstrong's already there. No images of him in the Ultra ads anymore, no more chasing the Nissan Leaf on the screen. That was income. No longer...USADA/Feds win.
 
Mar 17, 2009
2,295
0
0
eleven said:
Race Radio said:
eleven said:
Wait what? Making **** up? Speaking of making **** up, show me where I said the above. Don't worry, I'll wait for you to find me saying "The Feds lose over 50% of their doping cases"


He made 188M over the course of his career, 22M per year the last few seasons and he has a world series ring. He gave up 10M of that and will go down as one of the greatest players ever to take the field. I think we can consider that winning.



This might be your fervent hope, but there is no evidence to support it.
you said it was a 4% difference, that equals over 50% lost in clinic math.

the retraction will be on page 37 :D
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
patricknd said:
you said it was a 4% difference, that equals over 50% lost in clinic math.

the retraction will be on page 37 :D
Only because the admission wont come until page 36. :rolleyes:

I would like clarification on elevens statement...
eleven said:
No, in doping cases they more often lose. They managed to get Bonds on one count and to zero effect on his livelyhood. They failed in the Clemens case. They failed in the Armstrong case. They succeeded in the Jones case.

And you claimed the Fed only lost 3% of it's cases when, in reality, it was more than twice that amount. But hey, you got to cheer "scoreboard!" like the kids in the adult pool.
.... which obviously suggests a 50% + failure rate on doping cases.
 
May 18, 2009
3,758
0
0
Race Radio said:
All of the investigators and both prosecutors thought they Armstrong case was strong. They even drew up the charging papers. One guy ignored their advice and dropped it......for now

Clemens walked because of many years of work by his legal team kept key pieces of evidence out of the trial. You don't really think he was not guilty do you?
Are those the same investigators and prosecuters that thought syringes in a beer can mixed with others, a drug dealer who changed his tune many times, who has a wife that will testify he is a loon, kids at pool parties, and a waffling ex-friend were good enough evidence to bring Clemons to trial for lying to a bunch of liars? :rolleyes:

How dare the idiot higher-ups slap these investigators and prosecutors down, whose opinion on what should and should not go to trial is beyond reproach lol, when they had FFF, crazy betsy, and chimera lined up to slam dunk LA in front of a jury. That's even more credible than a beer can full of syringes. :D

JR said it best upthread, but RR you etal appear to have a basic misunderstanding about how the judicial system works in the US, and how it is supposed to work. Now, I know you are not that stupid but your rabidness is making you appear somewhat delusional.

BTW, heard on the radio on the way home today the Astros may look to sign Clemens to a PR position with the team.
 
Apr 20, 2009
960
0
0
Oldman said:
eleven said:
Race Radio said:
don't expect either guy to be selling much. When's the last time Bond's appeared in any endorsement ad? That seems to be a huge impact on a potential Hall of Famer's after sport income, doesn't it?
Sure, but probably not as much as the impact of his final few years at 22 million vs. what he otherwise would have been paid.

Armstrong's already there. No images of him in the Ultra ads anymore, no more chasing the Nissan Leaf on the screen. That was income. No longer...USADA/Feds win.
Same situation, to a smaller scale since most of his income was from sponsorships. Still, the money he made as a 7-time winner vs. his potential as a classics rider pre-cancer? I think we all know where that bread was buttered - and it wasn't the classics.
 
Apr 20, 2009
960
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Only because the admission wont come until page 36. :rolleyes:

I would like clarification on elevens statement...

.... which obviously suggests a 50% + failure rate on doping cases.
Well, we could make a list of every sporting PED / doping case DoJ has been involved in and then count the convictions to the athletes and leaders. Where do you want to start?

Michael Ball? Free man, no?
Armstrong? Free man.
Bruyneel? Free man.
Clemens? Free man.
Bonds? 10M for one charge and he's a free man.
Marion Jones? Convicted.
 
May 19, 2012
537
0
0
JRTinMA said:
http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-roger-clemens-poll-20120821,0,3343617.story

Comeback 3.0! Clemens still throwing 87mph heat! I know its probably impossible but if he could get into just 1 MLB game it would delay his HOF vote another 5 years giving him a much better shot at the Hall. Red Sox are 13.5 games out...
He'd have more of a chance if he was throwing 60mph junk with a knuckleball as his go to pitch.

He might be able to confound batters for a couple of wins a la Jim Bouton.

You really think he's going to blow an 87 mph heater by major league hitters?:D
 
Jeremiah said:
He'd have more of a chance if he was throwing 60mph junk with a knuckleball as his go to pitch.

He might be able to confound batters for a couple of wins a la Jim Bouton.

You really think he's going to blow an 87 mph heater by major league hitters?:D
lol, no but it would be fun to watch when we are 20 games out.
 
Jeremiah said:
He'd have more of a chance if he was throwing 60mph junk with a knuckleball as his go to pitch.

He might be able to confound batters for a couple of wins a la Jim Bouton.

You really think he's going to blow an 87 mph heater by major league hitters?:D
If he had that pitch now then it would be the ball that was juiced, with vaseline or spit.:D
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,530
1
0
87 mph? All four pitches working? Accuracy still there?

Sure he could win at least one ML game in relief.
Before the roid era high 80 fastballs were enough for MLB if you had the other above mentioned requirements.

But, i don´t know how it is today with all the drugs. Do pitchers throw regulary 95+ fastballs. Are bulked up hitters able to generate enough bat speed to hit those ball with ease nowadays?

I did not follow baseball anymore since contracts got out of hand (starting with Steroid-Rod in Texas), and this once beautiful game was destroyed once and for all on the altar of greed.
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
87 mph? All four pitches working? Accuracy still there?

Sure he could win at least one ML game in relief.
Before the roid era high 80 fastballs were enough for MLB if you had the other above mentioned requirements.

But, i don´t know how it is today with all the drugs. Do pitchers throw regulary 95+ fastballs. Are bulked up hitters able to generate enough bat speed to hit those ball with ease nowadays?

I did not follow baseball anymore since contracts got out of hand (starting with Steroid-Rod in Texas), and this once beautiful game was destroyed once and for all on the altar of greed.
You are missing the point that he only has to throw a single pitch to delay the HoF vote for five more years. This may improve his chances to get in the hall as time heals all wounds.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,530
1
0
I know, i guess that this is his true intention.

OTOH, i´d like to see if a 50 yr old can come back to the majors and have some sort of success...

Bonds, Steriod-Rod (WTF is he still playing, and WTF is wrong with americans to still hail such a greedy cheater, BTW), McGwire, Clemens, Sosa, etc. should never be elected to the HOF. But USA is different. They´ll elect some of this cheaters, while the messenger like Mr Octobre is shot. Sick. :mad:
 
Apr 20, 2009
960
0
0
JRTinMA said:
http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-roger-clemens-poll-20120821,0,3343617.story

Comeback 3.0! Clemens still throwing 87mph heat! I know its probably impossible but if he could get into just 1 MLB game it would delay his HOF vote another 5 years giving him a much better shot at the Hall. Red Sox are 13.5 games out...
Fracking brilliant. The DisAstros will certainly give him a chance to pitch - and his minor league team will certainly sell a few extra tix.

Too bad the 'Stros don't play the Bosox in Interleague. With both teams out of the running, a Clemens appearance would be epic.

as to whether a 50 year old can pitch in MLB - Jamie Moyer is 49, and Jamie Moyer is certainly no Roger Clemens. Clemens' only problem will be that he's a power pitcher.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts