The New McNamee Evidence

[Giants]

For those of you who spent the last 24 hours in a cave with your eyes shut and your fingers in your ears Brian McNamee has apparently turned over dirty needles to the feds to implicate Clemens. This takes me back to talk radio circa 2005 and all the Barry Bonds defenders (of which I was one for a while) being asked what it would take to convince them. Hosts joked about finding a five year old needle and all that, and now we actually have one for Clemens. So my question to you all is suppose this stuff actually comes back and does implicate Clemens, obviously there will be some folks out there who don't want to believe it, so what will it take to convince them (the more ridiculous the answer the better)?

[Mets]

It's to the point that I change the station now when they mention the name McNamee or Clemens...I'm over it.

[Twins]

If this evidence is upheld, I wonder what the strategy behind Clemens very public and forceful denial was...it probably would have just been better for him to remain silent.

[Royals]

The Strategy was probably that he had no idea McNamee held onto used needles for five years and it would be his word against McNamees.

Roger's fucked. Especially if he continued his denials to Congress.

[BlueJays]

This is all so laughable.

I'm not disputing that McNamee didn't have this evidence.. but why wasn't it turned over to Mitchell?

I just don't get this whole particular saga as it pertains to the steroid issue as a whole.

[DBacks]

at this point neither one of them seems very believable, which is awkward when you consider one of them has to be telling something close to the truth. I mean they both can't be completely full of shit, though at times it certainly seems that way.

there are reports that apparently say mc's camp warned roger's camp in january that he had evidence and they ignored it. it certainly raises a lot of questions, most notably, why would he save a needle for years and years? and why wait till now to bring it to surface? wouldn't he have tried to destroy evidence of them committing a crime instead of saving it? makes no sense.

[Nationals]

there are reports that apparently say mc's camp warned roger's camp in january that he had evidence and they ignored it. it certainly raises a lot of questions, most notably, why would he save a needle for years and years? and why wait till now to bring it to surface? wouldn't he have tried to destroy evidence of them committing a crime instead of saving it? makes no sense.

Why save it? Because in those years he came to KNOW Roger and realized that Mr. Clemens would gleefully throw him under the bus to save his own skin.

[Royals]

This is all so laughable.

I'm not disputing that McNamee didn't have this evidence.. but why wasn't it turned over to Mitchell?

I just don't get this whole particular saga as it pertains to the steroid issue as a whole.

Mitchell isn't a law enforcement official, turning it over to him doesn't mean anything. he might have wanted to hold a little something back as a back-up plan or additional bargaining chip.

[Cardinals]

I'm sure with a nice 'reasonable' blank check Clemens could have kept himself clean out of all of this.

[BlueJays]

I'm sure with a nice 'reasonable' blank check Clemens could have kept himself clean out of all of this.

Exactly JP.

I mean.. I don't know how many of you have lead any kind of life of crime.. but in that respect I have.

I had a partner in this crime - and you know what - if you go with the view of every evil criminal is in it to make a buck, why wouldn't you just shut mcnamee up with a big check? I know in fact if I got busted as well with something, I wouldn't rat out my other partner and he wouldn't rat me out either - even to save his own skin. Its honor amongst thieves.

It just doesn't make sense. None of it does.

You don't "save" evidence for years on end to pin the tail on your partner in crime. You just don't. Because you're confident enough in the trust to not rat on each other. Not to even mention the fact that if you're doing it in the first place, you're confident enough to not get caught.

I am not trying to defend Clemens. I have no clue if he did or did not. I just think this whole thing is a farse.

[DBacks]

From what I've heard today, the evidence that Mc presented doesn't really prove as much as people might think. People hear blood and needles and automatically want to convict Clemens, but what they're saying now is that the needles don't prove that.

The needles prove Clemens was injected with something, but we already know that. There are several substances Clemens has admitted to being injected with. It CANNOT be proven whether or not Mc added steroids after he injected Clemens with the needles.

Personally, I think they're both full of shit. But to take questionable evidence at face value from a shady character like McNamee would be dumb in my opinion. He's going to have to do a lot better than needles that could easily be fake to make me convict Roger Clemens. Innocent till proven guilty.

[Padres]

... to take questionable evidence at face value from a shady character like McNamee would be dumb in my opinion. He's going to have to do a lot better than needles [and other assorted items that have no clear chain of custody] that could easily be fake to make me convict Roger Clemens. Innocent till proven guilty.

Exactly!

[Royals]

From what I've heard today, the evidence that Mc presented doesn't really prove as much as people might think. People hear blood and needles and automatically want to convict Clemens, but what they're saying now is that the needles don't prove that.

The needles prove Clemens was injected with something, but we already know that. There are several substances Clemens has admitted to being injected with. It CANNOT be proven whether or not Mc added steroids after he injected Clemens with the needles.

Personally, I think they're both full of shit. But to take questionable evidence at face value from a shady character like McNamee would be dumb in my opinion. He's going to have to do a lot better than needles that could easily be fake to make me convict Roger Clemens. Innocent till proven guilty.

One of the problems with the "CSI culture" is that many criminal (and other) cases have come to EXPECT 'blood and/or semen' for conviction or as proof of guilt. this isn't a realistic expectation.

McNamee and Clemens had motive for the steroids use. They clearly had the means and opportunity.
McNamee doesn't have a motive to lie or try to set up Clemens. Clemens DOES have a motive to lie.
McNamee's testimony incriminated other players who have since acknowledged that McNamee was telling the truth.

Sorry guys, but this isn't some big questionable issue, this is an easy layup. Clemens is guilty.

[Cardinals]

Innocent till proven guilty.

Hope you're singing this tune with Belichick too.

[DBacks]

A quote from my spygate post.

Until there's hard evidence that they did something wrong, I really don't care.

[Cardinals]

A quote from my spygate post.

Until there's hard evidence that they did something wrong, I really don't care.

ok good. just making sure. i like consistency.

[Padres]

McNamee doesn't have a motive to lie or try to set up Clemens. Clemens DOES have a motive to lie ... Sorry guys, but this isn't some big questionable issue, this is an easy layup. Clemens is guilty.

ìYou can test to figure out what the substance is, but you cannot figure out how old it is,î Dr. Don Catlin, the former director of the Olympic testing lab at U.C.L.A., said in a telephone interview.

There is no way to date blood either, Catlin said, which means there may not be a conclusive way to establish that the syringes, vials and pads were from 2000 and 2001.

... ìThe handling of the syringes will be a very powerful argument on Clemensís behalf,î Catlin said. ìIn doping, the issue of chain of custody is always raised and these syringes appear to have been handled by the accuser. Itís generally the first line of attack from the lawyers.î

... ìClemensís defense lawyers will attack McNamee on cross-examination, claiming that the evidence was manufactured by McNamee in response to the revelation that Clemens had taped him,î Mathew Rosengart, an adjunct professor at Pepperdine and a former federal prosecutor, said in a telephone interview.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/07/sport ... ample.html

I am so glad we live in a country were true guilt and/or innocence is determined by review of cold hard facts and not by some circumstantial BS spewed forward by so-called experts who have no first hand knowledge of the actual events in question.

I personally have no idea whether or not Clemens used an illegal drug or not ... I have an absolute idea that he has not been proven guilty and I have no reason to accept the word of an admitted cheater like McNamee - particularly this so-called evidence which is nothing more then a cheap PR stunt that will never hold up in a court of laws.

Bren - your approach to this borders on fascism ...

[DBacks]

Bren - your approach to this borders on fascism ...

I hope you're not surprised by this.

[Royals]

Bren - your approach to this borders on fascism ...

The Nazi/Fascist messageboard principle never fails...

If you actually knew what fascism was, you wouldn't say that.
If you'd ACTUALLY read what I wrote you wouldn't have bothered to quote all the stuff about steroids and blood.
But you don't know anything about fascism aside from it being a label to throw on people you disagree with and you didn't bother to read the post before trying to tear it apart. So instead your post reinforces the stereotype of Mainers as ignorant potato farmers.

It doesn't matter what is in or on the syringes. Not One Bit.
McNamee had motive to give Clemens the PEDs (Clemens being his client), Clemens had motive to take them (the millions that came with the extension of his career), McNamee and Clemens had the means, they had the opportunity and McNamee has more credibility than Clemens. McNamee also has less motive to lie. We know ALL of this as fact from the public statements of the parties involved.
Perhaps this was difficult logic for you to follow Jim so I'll sum it up VERY simply...
Motive + Opportunity + Means + Credibility = Guilty

[DBacks]

Having slightly more credibility than Clemens means very little. That's like he saying he's slightly more intelligent than Skip Bayliss or he's slightly taller than Bren. Yeah, its a little bit more, but in the end, its still not significant. Both of their credibility is shot. It means squat.

And the means? Not so meaningful either. A shitload of people had the money and connections to get steroids if they wanted to. That hardly means they did it. Even when combining the "means" with the "motive" its still very hard to prove someone took roids.

In the end, what you really have is motive for both of them to lie, and not much else that really means anything. Something will break one way or the other eventually, and when it does, it'll come with some proof or a confession. You know, something actually worth convicting somebody over.

[Royals]

McNamee's credibility is backed up by Pettite's admission. Why would he lie about giving Clemens steroids? Clemens and he were apparently on good terms prior to this. There has been no charge that he tried to blackmail Clemens for money. He's a former cop, so it's pretty safe to assume he's familiar enough with the legal process to know that telling Mitchell he injected Clemens wasn't going to work as a means to blackmail him. Once he tells an investigator, the blackmail threat is pretty much off the board.

You mention proving someone took steroids. In what realm? In a court of law, what's come out already would almost certainly be enough to convict. An eye witness (much less an accomplice) with sufficient credibility along with motive and opportunity IS proof. In the court of public opinion, the same hold true, aside, of course, from those who want to insist their hero or the legend couldn't possibly have done this in spite of what the evidence says (I'm thinking particularly of all the Reds fans who backed Rose).

[Padres]

Bren - your approach to this borders on fascism ...

If you actually knew what fascism was, you wouldn't say that ... So instead your post reinforces the stereotype of Mainers as ignorant potato farmers.

Fascism, said the ignorant old non-potato farmer (though I do plant a lot of other stuff ...), is quite simply "an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers the individual subordinate to the interests of the state, party or society as a whole." A central element is totalitarianism.

A reading on my post stated that you, Bren BORDER on fascism in your authoritarian approach to this, If you stated even once that you were stating your opinion I would cut you some slack. But you plainly and clearly state your BS as fact when it is not. You clearly are denying any individual rights that Clemens has to due process as a citizen of the United States and instead you totally condemn him.

You act as the friggin' judge, jury and executioner when instead you are simply stating your totally biased hate filled opinion.

Resorting to name calling is not at all unexpected though ... a tactic often used by people who don't want to argue facts. If I was black I'd half expect you to call me a COON next ...

[BlueJays]

Fascism, said the ignorant old non-potato farmer (though I do plant a lot of other stuff ...), is quite simply "an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers the individual subordinate to the interests of the state, party or society as a whole." A central element is totalitarianism.

I plant a lot of other stuff too.. heheh.

Resorting to name calling is not at all unexpected though ... a tactic often used by people who don't want to argue facts. If I was black I'd half expect you to call me a COON next ...

That would be Aaron..

[Royals]

If you actually knew what fascism was, you wouldn't say that ... So instead your post reinforces the stereotype of Mainers as ignorant potato farmers.

Fascism, said the ignorant old non-potato farmer (though I do plant a lot of other stuff ...), is quite simply "an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers the individual subordinate to the interests of the state, party or society as a whole." A central element is totalitarianism.

A reading on my post stated that you, Bren BORDER on fascism in your authoritarian approach to this, If you stated even once that you were stating your opinion I would cut you some slack. But you plainly and clearly state your BS as fact when it is not. You clearly are denying any individual rights that Clemens has to due process as a citizen of the United States and instead you totally condemn him.

You act as the friggin' judge, jury and executioner when instead you are simply stating your totally biased hate filled opinion.

Congrats on your use of wikipedia but Wow, you're pretty full of shit. How am I putting the interests of a state or authority over those of an individual? By saying you're wrong? That there are facts involved, not just opinions? Are you actually arguing that I'm trying to repress Clemens somehow? Which part is BS? Please enlighten me. Which of the following parts is BS?

1. Did McNamee and Clemens have motive to use the PED's? Uhm, Duh, YES! So there's one FACT.

2. Did they have the opportunity? Another "Duh, yes!" We already know McNamee had access to such drugs during that time period and was giving Clemens injections of some kind. So that's another FACT (opportunity and means).

3. Does McNamee have more credibility? That's the trickier question. Both have credibility questions. McNamee however has had his claims backed up by Pettite's admissions which lends a lot more credence to McNamee's claims about Clemens. McNamee's greater credibility is an opinion based on Facts.

When people suggested in the past that Clemens took a half season off, not as some sort of retirement debate but instead because of a hush-hush steroid I defended Clemens. I've consistently argued for him as one of the two best pitchers of all time (Clemens or Pedro depending on whether you want to look at pure dominance or longevity). Hardly the actions of a biased hater.

oh, and if you start calling someone or someone's behaviour 'fascist' or 'nazi-like' then you can certainly expect some name-calling coming back so don't even try to climb on your high horse there Mainer.

[Padres]

It is the State of Bren - otherwise known as "my way or the highway!"

Again - I said your approach to this borders on fascism. I did not call you a name ...

Wiki or not ... anyone who knows anything about political ideology understands that fascism has as a basic tenet the disdain for the recognition of individual human rights. You Bren are obviously showing complete and total disdain for Clemens' rights as you have already stated it is a fact that he is guilty.