Roger Clemens Trial

Page 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 20, 2009
960
0
0
BroDeal said:
Clemens is likely to be just like Armstrong, someone whose entire career is based on drugs. Do you think that Clemens woke up one day in 1998 and said to himself, "Hey, I should start using steroids."

Uh, yes actually. Look at his career trajectory. He was in the "twilight of his career" when he left Boston. A shell of his former self.

I still can't believe the Feds are still pushing this case. They guy might have lied to a congressional panel. If that was the measure of perjury the entire staff at Heritage would be in jail.
 
eleven said:
Uh, yes actually. Look at his career trajectory. He was in the "twilight of his career" when he left Boston. A shell of his former self.

I still can't believe the Feds are still pushing this case. They guy might have lied to a congressional panel. If that was the measure of perjury the entire staff at Heritage would be in jail.

Mindy McCready was talking about Clemens' erectile dysfunction in the early '90s. Puffy Roger was probably suffering side effects as early as then.
 
eleven said:
They guy might have lied to a congressional panel. If that was the measure of perjury the entire staff at Heritage would be in jail.

Crazy stuff huh? Imagine basing a perjury charge on a lie told under oath. What is the world coming to?

Next thing you know, they'll be charging people with theft, just for stealing stuff.
 
eleven said:
Uh, yes actually. Look at his career trajectory. He was in the "twilight of his career" when he left Boston. A shell of his former self.

A lot of credibility there. The same person who has spent years defending Armstrong from doping accusations thinks that Clemens was clean until his career began to wind down. Who would've thought?

Next up: OJ was innocent.
 
McNamee now admits he lied before. I will be a little astounded if Clemens doesn’t walk. Not that I don’t believe the case against him, but just that McNamee is such a terrible witness. I really couldn't blame the jurors for not believing anything he said at this point.

Hardin's aim is to portray McNamee as a serial liar, and he appeared to have some success this day.
''Did you ever tell Sen. Mitchell that you injected Roger Clemens approximately four times in the rear over a two-week period in 1998?'' Hardin asked.
''That's possible,'' McNamee answered.
''If you did tell him ... would that be a lie?'' Hardin asked.
''Yes, it would,'' said McNamee, who testified this week that he injected Clemens about eight to 10 times during Clemens' 1998 season with the Toronto Blue Jays.
McNamee again maintained that he had minimized the number of shots to try to help out Clemens.
''I wanted to make it not look like he was a bigger steroids user than he was. ... I never lied about the usage, just amounts,'' he said.

And the circus will be in town for at least several more weeks:

The sputtering pace of the trial, now in its fifth week, is taking a noticeable toll on the jury. Two members of the panel already have been dismissed for sleeping, leaving 12 jurors and two alternates. Walton emerged from a morning break and said they've been asking again how long the trial will last.

Walton sounded incredulous when the government responded that it had 14 more witnesses to call, which would bring its total to 26. The judge then told the jury that he expects the trial to last through at least June 8.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/key-ac...0--spt.html;_ylt=AnAMB4hmSpEePJEsTWyjQFA5nYcB
 
Apr 20, 2009
960
0
0
MacRoadie said:
Crazy stuff huh? Imagine basing a perjury charge on a lie told under oath. What is the world coming to?

Next thing you know, they'll be charging people with theft, just for stealing stuff.

A lie under oath - to a congressional panel?

Can you please give the peanut gallery a list of people convicted (or even charged with!) perjury for lying to a congressional investigation?
 
Apr 20, 2009
960
0
0
BroDeal said:
A lot of credibility there. The same person who has spent years defending Armstrong from doping accusations

Who are you talking about here?

thinks that Clemens was clean until his career began to wind down. Who would've thought?
Which part of Clemens' Red Sox years leads you to believe he was doping? What specifically in his physique or performance indicated use of PED's available at that time?

Do you believe Bonds was doping in 1993? McGwire?
 
eleven said:
Who are you talking about here?

It's a Clinic thing.
(1) Everything (even Roger Clemens) is really about Lance Armstrong.
(2) Disagree with me and you are a defender of Lance Armstrong.

Once you understand those basic principles, the Clinic begins to make sense.
 
Apr 20, 2009
960
0
0
MarkvW said:
It's a Clinic thing.
(1) Everything (even Roger Clemens) is really about Lance Armstrong.
(2) Disagree with me and you are a defender of Lance Armstrong.

Once you understand those basic principles, the Clinic begins to make sense.

Unless you believe that Armstrong was the hub of a worldwide doping conspiracy involving as-yet unapproved drugs, convincing the media not to notice a USPS bus broken down on the side of the road and also involved molesting children, you're clearly defending Armstrong from doping accusations.

^I learned that right here in the clinic.
 
MarkvW said:
It's a Clinic thing.
(1) Everything (even Roger Clemens) is really about Lance Armstrong.
(2) Disagree with me and you are a defender of Lance Armstrong.

Once you understand those basic principles, the Clinic begins to make sense.

No, it's more like some people believe that guys who are making millions a year from playing a game will have no problem spending several hundred thou. a year on substances that will keep them making the millions. Other people believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny and Jesus. Who's to say who is right.:rolleyes:
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,529
1
0
Funny how some people defend every famous doper. Armstrong, McGwire, Clemens, Bonds, etc... all dopers. So does it really matter if they did it in 93 or just started in 94 when the HR rates really got up?
 
eleven said:
A lie under oath - to a congressional panel?

Can you please give the peanut gallery a list of people convicted (or even charged with!) perjury for lying to a congressional investigation?

Is it, or is it not a crime?

18 U.S.C. § 1001 : US Code - Section 1001: Statements or entries generally

a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any
matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or
judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly
and willfully
-
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or
device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
statement or representation
; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the
same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years
or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as
defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or
both.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial
proceeding, or that party's counsel, for statements,
representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or
counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the
legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to -
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a
matter related to the procurement of property or services,
personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a
document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to
the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative
branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the
authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of
the Congress
, consistent with applicable rules of the House or
Senate.
 
LMAO, this just gets better and better:

With McNamee finished after five-plus days on the stand, prosecutors called a Miller-Coors manager to testify about the beer can McNamee says he used to store waste after an alleged steroids injection of Clemens in August 2001. The witness, Anthony Manuele, looking at markings on the bottom of the can, was able to confirm that it would have been on shelves between August 2001 and Nov. 15, 2001 - coinciding with McNamee's timeframe.

Hardin, on cross-examination, needled prosecutors by asking Manuele, ''You don't sell these beer cans to keep needles, do you?''

The judge sustained a government objection, but not before Manuele could answer, ''No, sir.''

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/witnes...0--spt.html;_ylt=ArOrhDjv1hbXQSq3s_aJFmgRvLYF
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
1
0
What kind of message does this verdict send?

Can be summed up in the last sentence of Roger's tear studdered response to being found not quilty:

"HARD WORK and TEAM MATES"

That is the BEST possible message to send.
Silver Lining - almost makes all the wasted taxpayer money worth it.
No, not almost - it does make it worth it.

"HARD WORK and TEAM MATES"

Golden Rule of Sports.
Doping = Fail.