April 28, 2008

From what I've heard, this is all specualation. Clemens has confirmed that he knows Mindy McCready and that she is a family friend and has been for quite some time. All of this information has been given out by Brian McNamee's lawyer, Richard Emery in order to make Clemens out to be a scumbag and also to make their case against Clemens that no one should believe what he has to say. This is a classic case of mudslinging that we've see in politics but of course this is just a ploy to misdirect people's attention into believing McNamee and not Clemens. Good job though.

posted by BornIcon at 10:13 AM on April 28, 2008

At this point, I feel the worst for Roger's kids. Mudslinging? Yep, I'll buy that. Now, if RC did use steroids, HGH, or anything else being questioned, is he still willing to deny it as these accusations continue. They price of lying is increasing. If he didn't use, then he has a huge uphill battle to repair his name, if that's even possible. Either way, it seems totally inappropriate (for Mcnamee's lawyer) to defend his client by claiming his opponent is a child molester. (prediction: 153 posts)

posted by BoKnows at 10:52 AM on April 28, 2008

Either way, it seems totally inappropriate (for Mcnamee's lawyer) to defend his client by claiming his opponent is a child molester. Absolutely. For Richard Emery to come out and make these accusations is low, even for a lawyer. The on-going case is about whether Clemens did in fact take steroids or if McNamee is just a liar. This has nothing to do with Clemens' sex life but I guess that is the price you pay for trying to clear your name.

posted by BornIcon at 11:05 AM on April 28, 2008

BoKnows, where did it say Emery outed this information or called Clemens a child molester?

posted by jerseygirl at 11:11 AM on April 28, 2008

This shows you the morals that most lawyers have, none. Oh, how I love categorical indictments. Makes me think of a saying the police had back in the 60's (a period when they were categorically disparaged by many): "Next time you're in trouble, call a hippie."

posted by DudeDykstra at 11:22 AM on April 28, 2008

(prediction: 153 posts) I'd wager heavy on the over.

posted by tommybiden at 11:33 AM on April 28, 2008

BoKnows, where did it say Emery outed this information or called Clemens a child molester? I was wondering that myself. If there's a link where he calls Clemens a child molester, I'd be interested to see it. McCready is also someone who was jailed a few years back for drug-related reasons. If there is any truth to this accusation I tend to believe she'll come out with it fairly quickly and not risk getting herself in more trouble. It could also be somewhat of a "break" for her, as stupid as that sounds, in that she's trying for a career comeback with several potential projects on the horizon. The legal and baseball troubles into which Rocket has pushed his little self-contained bubble have nothing to do with this barely-newsworthy non-event. You really believe that? Clemens' entire defense to everything he's ever been accused of was based on his honesty. He really hasn't even dealt with legal troubles yet, but he's well on his way to having to. And if something does come out about anything inappropriate when this person (McCready) was underage, then I tend to believe it may become somewhat of a newsworthy event.

posted by dyams at 11:39 AM on April 28, 2008

dyams, Rocket hasn't defended himself based on his "honesty." Well, okay, maybe that's what he thinks he's done, but out here on the other side of that membrane that separates him from the rest of the world, it's been more a matter of his right arm and his bluster allowing him to bully his way through everything he's ever come up against in life, and this is the first time he's experienced (or at least noticed) serious push-back. His arm is fading fast, and may be gone for good. His coterie of fartcatchers and sycophants is dwindling, and what we're seeing here, regardless of whether this story has any merit, is the flaking away of what used to be his trusted and loyal inner circle. The charges don't interest me. The dismantling of his cone of insulation, however, I find fascinating.

posted by chicobangs at 11:50 AM on April 28, 2008

I think we're really missing out on some new merchandise with the tagline, SportsFilter: A sports coterie of fartcatchers and sychopants.

posted by jerseygirl at 11:56 AM on April 28, 2008

The charges don't interest me. The dismantling of his cone of insulation, however, I find fascinating. Yeah, I can agree with that. On the surface, the charges, as well as this possible affair may be nothing out-of-the-ordinary. I like the "dismantling of his cone of insulation" comment, because that's a great way of phrasing it. She's a loon. I remember that story, being a Country fan, and she went completely bonkers. She has definitely had a lot of problems, and yes, she was married to (TV Superman Dean Cain). But even after she continued to unravel, Clemens reportedly was sending her big chunks of cash so she could defend herself. If true, it goes to show even more how Clemens and his ego think he can go about doing practically anything and it will never be called into question by anyone. It may all be rising to the surface. SportsFilter: A sports coterie of fartcatchers and sychopants. Do you mean sychophants?

posted by dyams at 12:03 PM on April 28, 2008

Engaged to him and he broke it off a year later according to his imdb.com bio.

posted by jerseygirl at 12:06 PM on April 28, 2008

No, its sicko pants.

posted by jerseygirl at 12:19 PM on April 28, 2008

It's sycophant. Look it up. I was mainly wondering about her word as possibly something I didn't know the definition of, not so much about the spelling. But thanks, worldcup, and I'll take your well-intended advice and look it up.

posted by dyams at 12:22 PM on April 28, 2008

True, but saying it in public and really meaning it are two different things, it's all about spin and the means to an end.

posted by whitedog65 at 12:34 PM on April 28, 2008

I felt bad about Kody, Karly, Krusty, Kowlick and Kokomo Clemens long before this. I'm not tuned into Clemens' personal life, but are those names for real? If so, I would find this to be the most disturbing news of all. Doing my part to get this past 153 posts.

posted by THX-1138 at 01:07 PM on April 28, 2008

"I finally bagged me a Homer" by Lurleen Lumpkin comes to mind. Gosh, you guys really make my study breaks from law school special.

posted by tahoemoj at 01:19 PM on April 28, 2008

Hey, 15 in country music years is around 32. Plus, messin' around while married is part of the C&W experience So thats why Texas is the polygamy capital of the western world.

posted by irunfromclones at 02:09 PM on April 28, 2008

Who does Clemens think he is, Rick Springfield? Gross. I hadn't thought Jesse's Girl was talking about an actual child. I thought it was about Jesse's significant other. (one post closer to 153 posts)

posted by bperk at 02:33 PM on April 28, 2008

I wonder if he's not more like the David Koresh of baseball. (I don't think we're gonna make it to 153, unless the evening reactionary brigade comes through in a big way. I just sense we're not really feeling this one.)

posted by chicobangs at 02:39 PM on April 28, 2008

I just sense we're not really feeling this one. Cause it comes as no surprise that Clemens would do a a druggy 15 year old?

posted by irunfromclones at 02:45 PM on April 28, 2008

/feels chicobangs

posted by jmd82 at 02:51 PM on April 28, 2008

Roger Clemens does not have a child named Krusty, more's the pity. The four (legitimate acknowledged) Clemens offspring are Koby Aaron, Kory Allen, Kacy Austin, and Kody Alec. I have two questions here: 1. There are names that legitimately begin with K, so why not use some of them? Kurt, Kevin, like that? 2. We all know what the K is for, but what's up with the A? (doin' my part)

posted by lil_brown_bat at 02:59 PM on April 28, 2008

hawkguy: in brackets, font size=-2 to start it off, /font to stop. So where did this allegedly happen -- in Texas or Kansas or where?

posted by lil_brown_bat at 03:07 PM on April 28, 2008

2. We all know what the K is for, but what's up with the A? It stands for "Adulterer". Clemens' guilt follows him into the subconscious middle naming of his progeny. Goodness, I'm a wit. And that's one more for the tally. We have a cause here, people. Let's do some good.

posted by THX-1138 at 03:16 PM on April 28, 2008

Actually the easier way is <small>text goes here</small> which creates text goes here don't count this one in the comment count ;)

posted by scully at 03:32 PM on April 28, 2008

How did you write the text goes here with the small tag without making it actually turn small? If that made any sense at all.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 03:41 PM on April 28, 2008

I thought this post might have a logical discussion of how this issue, if it turns out to be true, might negatively impact Clemens as he faces further legal issues. It was obvious his credibility was what was really in question when he faced Congress on the steroids issue, and as he moves on with an intent on a defamation lawsuit. I apologize for my mistake in posting this. Much of the junk about posting to 153 and such only reinforces what I've been feeling for some time now. This site used to be enjoyable, but it just isn't anymore. There are far too many people who either seem to be bitter about practically everything, or want to jump on someone when they ask a question. I made a honest question a bit ago about a certain word and, in turn, someone jumped down my throat. And I've hardly ever gotten involved in all the spelling and grammar stuff, and today had a question about definition. Anyways, it's been fun while it lasted, and consider this my final post.

posted by dyams at 04:05 PM on April 28, 2008

Wow, dyams. I was thinking that the conversation was going much BETTER than expected. I don't think anyone meant harm about the comment count, and I apologise for my role in the derail on HTML, etc. I hope you'll have a cold one, watch Sports Center and reconsider.

posted by scully at 04:28 PM on April 28, 2008

dyams: I meant no harm by the comment prediction, I'm sorry if I've caused a stir. But I agree with terrapin, this thread has been pleasantly mild. If Clemens had sex with a 15-year-old when he was 28, as the newspaper alleges, that's statutory rape in most states -- including Florida, where they reportedly met. Why isn't that discussed at all in the article? That's sort of, in a round about way, where I was heading rcade, with my molester comment. Plus, I still think it was a shallow move by McNamee's lawyer to even comment on this story. Me thinks he should've dismissed the alegations and just concentrate on his case.

posted by BoKnows at 04:54 PM on April 28, 2008

My smart ass response to this is because this is all conjecture brought on in part by a lawyer trying to defame a man who brought a defamation suit against his client. There has been no proof offered, and until there is, I will show no respect to this "story." Sorry if I offended anyone.

posted by hawkguy at 05:33 PM on April 28, 2008

If dyams is really gone over this, then he was close to going already. I thought there was a discussion going on in this thread about his steriod issues and FBI entanglements and how this affects them, as well as his public face. And that will continue. It's just that we've been through this in Clemens threads ad absurdum already. This is just another dimension that reinforces what everyone already may or may not believe about him. This may not have been the most sports-related post in the world, but now that it's here, we can discuss the related issues while riffing on it. I didn't see anything insulting in here to anyone who didn't deserve it, and even the Clemens hate has been couched in the appropriate amount of if-he-did-it-then-this-is-my-reaction.

posted by chicobangs at 06:00 PM on April 28, 2008

Joey, if you think those "unnamed sources" have nothing to do with the plaintiff's lawyers, I would beg to differ. And yes, I read the link.

posted by hawkguy at 06:09 PM on April 28, 2008

It's the sense of irreverence and wise-acreishness that attracted me to this site in the first place. If you lose that and only have the option of serious sports discussion, this place, for me at least, would become dullsville. Or maybe just a lot less fun. I thought sports could be a fun subject to talk about. On topic: I'm not too sure that it was McNamee's lawyer who tipped the press or whoever about Clemens' possible infidelities. My gut reaction leans more towards McCready or a publicist for her trying to get some attention for a return to fame/public awareness/self promotion. Off topic again: Where HTML issues are concerned, I am a caveman. I only have smart ass comments to contribute here. I gaze in wonderment at the magic of red font and multiple linking. I am not of the body.

posted by THX-1138 at 06:36 PM on April 28, 2008

This post is entirely worthwhile simply for the additions of 'coterie' and 'fartcatcher'. Goddamn, that's just wicked stuff. Chico in top form, as per the usual. I'm presently giving you a helluva sitting, slient ovation. And thankfully - I have nothing further to add except that Clemens is clearly working on the Bigger Dick theory of earth inhabitation and why Barry Bonds is more vilifed than this asshole is something that will never hold actual water.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 06:42 PM on April 28, 2008

and even the Clemens hate has been couched in the appropriate amount of if-he-did-it-then-this-is-my-reaction. I've used those words in this thread, but from me it isn't a form of hate. I'm pretty much indifferent about Roger Clemens as a person, or whether he lied or not. I guess I've resigned myself to the fact that steroids have been very prevalent in baseball over the recent years. So if I were to hate RC because he's a steroid user and then lied about it, I guess I'd have to hate a large population of MLB. Now, if it's factual that he was involved with a 15 year old, I think the hate would be more evident, at least from me. Frankly, I don't believe it to have been a sexual relationship, and it seems that many others share that opinion as well. Which again, is why I think it's a low class move on the part of McNamee's lawyer. If Emery's got the goods on Clemens already, then why associate yourself and your client with this story?

posted by BoKnows at 07:19 PM on April 28, 2008

thought it was Florida, because he was in spring training with the Red Sox in Fort Myers... and she's from Fort Myers. For the record, the time period in question (1991 spring training), the Red Sox did not have spring training in Fort Myers. They had spring training in Winter Haven, which is 2-2.5 hours drive away. It's possible that Clemens and his teammates drove all that way for karaoke, but it does seem odd.

posted by grum@work at 07:32 PM on April 28, 2008

If this isn't true, and there aren't any other similar stories out there lying in wait, then Clemens has the mother of all libel suits if he wants it. We'll see what comes out (hey, Elvis first met Priscilla when she was 14, but he reputedly kept his hands off her until things were kosher), but there's an awful lot of realistic-looking smoke here for there to not be any fire at all.

posted by chicobangs at 08:43 PM on April 28, 2008

What are the time limits on statuatory rape charges in Florida? If I'm right, this is actually a brilliant bit of media manipulation by Clemens' camp to ultimately make him look like a victim of a media smear campaign I think that's a bit of a stretch. I can't see lawyers sitting around the table going... "okay, so the steroid case isn't going well, I know, let's throw out a story about how you had an affair with a drugged up 15 year old back in 1991" not even half way to 153...looks good for the under. This thread is just fine, though being from Texas I do take offense to the remark about Texas being the polygamy capital of the western world. From the story I read, Clemens only had his wife and Mindy...two women is pretty amateurish for polygamists by our standards

posted by dviking at 09:56 PM on April 28, 2008

Dudes, this story even made the papers down here. American baseball scandals normally don't get a run, so imagine some sub-editor noticed the underage sex angle instead. They had to explain who Clemens was, and then who Mindy was, too. Texas being the polygamy capital of the western world I'm sure that title has been awarded in perpetuity to Utah. This has been part of the southern hemisphere's contribution to Project 153.

posted by owlhouse at 10:30 PM on April 28, 2008

I just keep trying to figure out how a PR/promotion group could think this is a good way to present their client for future work. Let's think. mmmm She has had drug and legal problems in the past so let's put out the story of her hanging out in bars at 15 and having a "relationship" with a married baseball player (and RC makes it all the better because he is universally loved). So now she sounds even more like a skank. Mothers now will really want their daughters to buy her records and watch her shows. Yeah, that's the ticket!!! Let's go with that!!! I don't get it.....

posted by gfinsf at 04:16 AM on April 29, 2008

Mothers now will really want their daughters to buy her records and watch her shows. You clearly don't know much about her. She is more famous for her personal life than for her songs. She does not deny the story.

posted by bperk at 06:11 AM on April 29, 2008

I just keep trying to figure out how a PR/promotion group could think this is a good way to present their client for future work. You need to think like a reality TV producer. Those shows work better when the stars are a trainwreck, like the Osbournes or Puck on Real World. Her new show Mending Mindy is about how screwed up she's been. My guess is that the leaks here, if there's really an affair, came from that TV show rather than McNamee's lawyers. They have a lot more to gain, and nothing to lose by getting this story out there. The PR angle I'm having trouble with is the notion Clemens' team would release a fake underage sex story to make him look good. The risks are too high. When an allegation is this sensational, most people won't care whether it's true or not. They'll just enjoy it.

posted by rcade at 07:03 AM on April 29, 2008

From the story:

After the teenage McCready met Clemens at a Fort Myers bar called The Hired Hand, she returned with the Rocket to his hotel room, but there was no sex that night, sources told The News. It wasn't until later, after McCready had moved to Nashville and become a country singing star, that the relationship turned intimate.

McCready was 18 when she moved to Nashville, according to Wikipedia, so it appears that some source wants to clear him of statutory issues. Clemens bringing a 15-year-old up to his hotel room for the night, though, is completely skeevy. He was a 28-year-old MVP and Cy Young winner. Was he hoping he might be able to take her to prom? When Clemens filed the defamation suit against McNamee, it opened the door to all kinds of things that could be revealed in depositions under penalty of perjury. The fact that he filed the suit anyway, knowing that he had stuff like this affair in his past, suggests to me that Clemens is (a) an enormous risk taker, and (b) egotistical enough to believe he can win any fight he undertakes. These traits lend credence to the idea that he took the equally stupid risk of lying to Congress.

posted by rcade at 07:12 AM on April 29, 2008

Also, off topic, maybe we should go to the locker room and talk about why dyams is leaving. It seemed to work in the past and I feel he is one of the best contributers here and I would hate to see him leave.

posted by gfinsf at 08:10 AM on April 29, 2008

When Clemens filed the defamation suit against McNamee, it opened the door to all kinds of things that could be revealed in depositions under penalty of perjury. I don't think this will be relevant to his defamation suit. I don't see anywhere in the complaint that he filed that he talks about his sterling reputation as a family man. The suit is about damage to his professional reputation. It is just wishful thinking on the part of McNamee's lawyers. It would not greatly surprise me to find out that the story is true, but that Clemens did not know how young this lady was until well after the deed was done. Could the cash he supposedly sent to her have been in order to purchase silence? Interesting that your conjecture puts him in the best possible light and her in the worst.

posted by bperk at 08:38 AM on April 29, 2008

Does the term "I cannot refute anything in the story" constitute an admission that the story is true, or does it mean that MS McCready cannot disprove anything in the story? There's a huge difference between those 2 interpretations. If she didn't have sex with him, she could certainly come out and say "I did not have sex with him". The fact that she says (through tears according to the article) "I cannot refute anything in the story" pretty much gives you your answer. Apparently she wasn't 15 when the "affair" happened though as it didn't happen until later (not when they first met). So at least we get statuatory rapist out of his profile if that's true (but bad husband and liar remains). The fact that he filed the suit anyway, knowing that he had stuff like this affair in his past, suggests to me that Clemens is (a) an enormous risk taker, and (b) egotistical enough to believe he can win any fight he undertakes. These traits lend credence to the idea that he took the equally stupid risk of lying to Congress. amen to that. And if he knows this Mindy thing is true, he KNOWS they will subpoena her to testify. Does he think she is dumb enough to lie to a federal jury too? For him? His egotism knows no bounds, apparently.

posted by bdaddy at 09:11 AM on April 29, 2008

don't ever, ever stick your dingle in the hoo-ha of someone crazier than you chico, you inadvertently just made a great title for the memoirs of both Roger Clemens and Kevin Federline.

posted by NerfballPro at 10:34 AM on April 29, 2008

What smithnyiu said. That's sound advice even if you don't have groupies. Or a dingle.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 11:11 AM on April 29, 2008

But don't ever, ever stick your dingle in the hoo-ha of someone crazier than you Don't change a thing chico, that right there is classic!!

posted by BornIcon at 11:41 AM on April 29, 2008

Is dyams really leaving?

posted by yzelda4045 at 12:04 PM on April 29, 2008

But don't ever, ever stick your dingle in the hoo-ha of someone crazier than you. It will only bring you insanely disproportionate amounts of grief. I felt it would be best to include the full meaning of this very accurate statement. This is a truth which I have sadly learned without the benefit of being told. Divorce lawyers can be expensive. And I will be using this as my closing statement with my two boys during our "talk". I'll let mama (#2 wife=sane ) put it in her own words when she "talks" with our daughter. I submit this as evidence that good is being served with this thread.

posted by THX-1138 at 12:17 PM on April 29, 2008

I don't think this will be relevant to his defamation suit. Well defamation is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim that may harm the reputation of an individual. This whole McCreedy thing is relevant because 1) it helps show a lack of credibility. He says the steroids claim is a lie. He also says this thing with McCreedy is a lie. If they were to put her on stand and she says it's true, that destroys his credibility (he lied about one to save face, why wouldn't he lie about the other to save face) 2) It would be harder to argue that the steroid claim harms his reputation if you can show his reputation isn't as shiny as he claims.

posted by bdaddy at 01:42 PM on April 29, 2008

If I'm wrong, I owe dyams a beer. I officially owe dyams a beer. MY PLAN ALL ALONG.

posted by Joey Michaels at 01:59 PM on April 29, 2008

2) It would be harder to argue that the steroid claim harms his reputation if you can show his reputation isn't as shiny as he claims. The grounds for the suit is defamation per se, which means that Clemens doesn't have to prove damages because it is a statement about his professional character. It is true that depositions are more free form, but you can't ask questions just to embarrass the person being deposed. Clemens' lawyers would just instruct him not to answer.

posted by bperk at 03:07 PM on April 29, 2008

I officially owe dyams a beer You buyin that beer at The Hired Hand?

posted by irunfromclones at 04:04 PM on April 29, 2008

No, but the simplest defense in a defamation suit is to prove that you were telling the truth. To do this, I would assume you would be allowed to show how the plaintiff is UN-truthful, so this line of questioning could be allowed if the right argument is made. Showing that Clemens has lied about something completely unrelated would not help McNamee show that McNamee's statements are true. That's what the syringes are for. But they can't stop McCreedy from answering when she is called (which they have already indicated that they will likely subpeona her). The witness has to have something relevant to offer. How do people still give clemens the benefit of the doubt at this point? I thought it was run-of-the-mill misogyny - not a particular love of Clemens.

posted by bperk at 04:42 PM on April 29, 2008

I thought it was run-of-the-mill misogyny Not the judgement of the action, but that he did it at all. Clemens just has this texas-matter-of-fact-in-your-face personality that people just seem to eat up. He's proof that if you deny-deny-deny in the face of all common sense some people will be swayed. He's turned it into an art form.

posted by justgary at 04:51 PM on April 29, 2008

Miley Cyrus denies claims Vanity Fair photos were originally proposed by Clemens. See? That sounds completely plausible to me.

posted by justgary at 05:25 PM on April 29, 2008

36 to go

posted by brandy at 10:30 PM on April 29, 2008

Hey goddam did you see Ron Duguay at the Ranger game tonight. Seeing his wicked hair totally made me think of you. Is there any relation between Mind McCready and Mike McCready? Glad to help boys and girls.

posted by HATER 187 at 11:33 PM on April 29, 2008

The bricklayer doing so does as well, but, again, 15 year old girls rarely are overwhelmed by the presence of a bricklayer to the point that they make poor decisions. To which I respectfully counter with Joey Buttofuoco. I just think that auto mechanics, bricklayers, carpenters can be role models. I heard Jesus was a carpenter and a lot of people look up to him. Literally and figuratively. Admirable traits can be found in all walks of life, as can poor examples of choice-making behavior. Anything to get the post count up.

posted by THX-1138 at 11:46 PM on April 29, 2008

Hey goddam did you see Ron Duguay at the Ranger game tonight. Seeing his wicked hair totally made me think of you. Didn't see him tonight. I was at the Yankee game. I did see him one other night he was on though.

posted by goddam at 12:55 AM on April 30, 2008

Don't think there's any relation between Mike and Mindy, Hater. Mork and Mindy, however, didn't they get married at one point?

posted by jerseygirl at 06:03 AM on April 30, 2008

We might make the 153, but this thread will have the taint of performance-enhancing subtopics about it. Even if such an accusation would never hold up in a court of interweb law.

posted by chicobangs at 07:02 AM on April 30, 2008

Schneider hated my bike too? That stings.

posted by rcade at 07:23 AM on April 30, 2008

If it's any consolation, rcade, I have no relatives named Pat.

posted by owlhouse at 08:55 AM on April 30, 2008

Who said anything about treating Roger Clemens as if he was the victim? The immediate jump to the conclusion by several posters that McNamee's lawyer was responsible for the story without evidence to support it is most definitely giving the benefit of the doubt to Clemens. The idea that McCready was blackmailing Clemens was mentioned. Posters stated that they flat out didn't believe the story or that Clemens wasn't that dumb. This is exactly what justgary was talking about. What has Clemens ever done to deserve this deference? Oh, I know, he can throw a baseball very fast.

posted by bperk at 09:34 AM on April 30, 2008

I was one of those posters. But in no way was I giving the benefit of the doubt to Clemens. My thoughts were closer to: I can't believe how far people will go to win a lawsuit. And for Emery to comment, on what was then an uncomfirmed story, is low. Maybe I've giving to much credit to lawyers ethics. A lawyer's ethical duties are to a vigorous defense of his client. Emery's comments are towards that end. Clemens' own conduct got him in this mess, Emery didn't. Further, Clemens's entire suit is arguing that McNamee is a big, fat liar. Winning the lawsuit means proving that you aren't a liar. I think you and some other posters are giving Clemens the benefit of the doubt because you are looking at it from his point of view. It looks very different from McNamee's point of view. Clemens files a defamation suit against you for telling the truth just to cover his own ass. He mentions some rape charge against you that never went anywhere in order to damage your reputation. Then lo and behold, Clemens gets caught having a relationship with a 15-year old girl. From that, you still think McNamee and his lawyer should say "no comment." I wouldn't I'd say that I hope people start seeing Clemens for who he really is.

posted by bperk at 10:13 AM on April 30, 2008

And I understand that by making a comment that I believe this to be 'mudslinging', how that could be interpreted as defending Clemens. Mudslinging is dirt thrown at your opponenet, most often not true. Who is the opponent in this story? There is none. You've created a false conflict to dismiss the allegations.

posted by bperk at 10:28 AM on April 30, 2008

Mudslinging is dirt thrown at your opponenet... That is the way I used the term mudslinging. Nothing more, nothing less. No need to look further into it.

posted by BornIcon at 11:04 AM on April 30, 2008

Can I help? Oop's guess I just did (139)

posted by azdano at 11:31 AM on April 30, 2008

Your first comment jumped to the conclusion that the McNamee's lawyer is at fault. Then when you realized that wasn't the case, you flat out said that you didn't believe the story. Fair enough. That's true. I also apologized and admitted that I misread the article. But me jumping on Emery wasn't because I was giving the benefit of the doubt to Clemens, I did it because it wouldn't surprise me that a lawyer would go to the length of making the info public. The ethical line for good lawyering would, of course, prohibit making up a story like this, but not using it as a reminder that this is the kind of thing they will be looking into to defend against the defamation suit. I agree, terrapin said much of the same. And I understand that it's done that way. We're gonna defend our name by trashing our opponents name. That's bad sportsmanship, if you ask me. Personally, it just seems shitty. Am I really that good of a person? Am I the only one who thinks the ethics line needs to be raised a bit. Again, no one person is getting any leeway here from me, they're all lairs.

posted by BoKnows at 12:11 PM on April 30, 2008

That is the way I used the term mudslinging. Nothing more, nothing less. No need to look further into it. Then you'll have to pardon me for pointing out bperk's point, which is (AS FAR AS WE KNOW) that McNamee's side didn't sling anything, the lawyer was called for comment and gave one.

posted by yerfatma at 12:40 PM on April 30, 2008

If I was McNamee, and was able to prove, without a doubt, that I am "innocent", then I'd want my lawyer to concentrate on that, and that alone. There is a couple of different things. First, there is never any certainty in litigation. You have to do what you can to make your case as strong as possible. A lot of litigation is about trying lots of different arguments and seeing what works. Second, in a case like this where you are unlikely to see a quick dismissal, the litigation costs could be extraordinary. No problem there for Clemens, but a huge problem for McNamee. Even innocence is no defense against a litigation machine with seemingly endless resources. McNamee's best case scenario, whether he is telling the truth or not, is for Clemens to drop the case.

posted by bperk at 01:19 PM on April 30, 2008

If I was McNamee, and was able to prove, without a doubt, that I am "innocent", then I'd want my lawyer to concentrate on that That's a tautology. If you were able to prove without a doubt you were innocent, you wouldn't be in court. Except the law isn't math and there's no "without a doubt" except relative to the frame of reference of a set of jurors or a judge.

posted by yerfatma at 02:16 PM on April 30, 2008

Can we close the thread when it gets to 153?

posted by hawkguy at 03:58 PM on April 30, 2008

153! We are the champions, my friends ...

posted by worldcup2002 at 04:33 PM on April 30, 2008

Who said anything about treating Roger Clemens as if he was the victim? Bperk said it better than I did in far fewer words: The immediate jump to the conclusion by several posters that McNamee's lawyer was responsible for the story without evidence to support it is most definitely giving the benefit of the doubt to Clemens. The idea that McCready was blackmailing Clemens was mentioned. Posters stated that they flat out didn't believe the story or that Clemens wasn't that dumb. As someone that's followed clemens' career pretty closely there's not much that he could be accused of that I wouldn't at least think possibly could be true. From your first post you said "clemens said...". I wouldn't trust anything that came out of clemens' mouth, and I don't see how you can quote him as if it holds water at all. It doesn't. The man lies so much he wouldn't recognize the truth if it was injected into his ass. If I was McNamee, and was able to prove, without a doubt, that I am "innocent", then I'd want my lawyer to concentrate on that, and that alone. And I would not want my name anywhere near an allegation that involves the plaintiff and a 15 year... That may be noble, but as already pointed out that's not really based in reality. It's not often in court someone can prove without doubt they're innocent. If they could, it probably wouldn't be going to court. McNamee is facing someone with more resources and money than he can imagine. Clemens will use anything and everything; McNamee would be a fool not to do the same.

posted by justgary at 04:58 PM on April 30, 2008

FWIW, the moneyquote of the Lester Munson ESPN piece I linked above is:

Q: What is the total effect of these tantalizing allegations on Clemens' defamation case? A: It might lead to the end of the lawsuit. Even though the evidence is almost certainly inadmissible, the reports of the romance add to a series of problems that have plagued the suit. McNamee's attorneys have raised a powerful argument that Rusty Hardin, Clemens' lead attorney should be disqualified from participation in the case (see April 14 story). And even with his assertions that McCready is a family friend, Clemens cannot be looking forward to an investigation and eventual deposition of McCready. He could avoid all of this and any future embarrassment by dismissing the case now and cutting his losses.

Basically, if suggesting that she might be called as a witness is embarrassing enough to Clemens, he might drop the suit, which is in McNamee's favor.

posted by Joey Michaels at 07:11 PM on April 30, 2008

I wouldn't trust anything that came out of clemens' mouth, and I don't see how you can quote him as if it holds water at all Where exactly did I "quote him"? All I said from my first post was that Clemens acknowledged knowing her...and? How does that make it seem as if I believe everything & anything that the guy has to say? My point is that this type of tactic of "piggybacking" on someone else's "mudslinging" towards Clemens just seems low, even for a lawyer but hey, if it works for the betterment of his client, good for them.

posted by BornIcon at 07:59 AM on May 01, 2008

When it rains, it pours, or in Roger's case, the floodgates have opened. Maybe its an obvious question, but why didn't any of these mounting claims come out before now? Was Clemens off the mound lifestyle as untouchable as his on the mound pitches? and no, "mounting" was not intended as a pun

posted by irunfromclones at 05:28 PM on May 01, 2008

Now that the Mrs. Daly situation has been thrown out there, be it true or not, I'd have to agree that it's time for the Rocket to let his lawsuit go. Or could it be that he wants so badly to save his professional reputation that he's willing to have his personal reputation completely trashed? How long before Mrs. Clemens cuts her losses?

posted by captaincavegirl at 10:15 PM on May 01, 2008

Great link irunfromclones! Love the irony of Clemens watching the Golden Girls because "those bitches are hot!" So, if we're keeping score, (and who isn't?), this is at least two affairs for the Rocket. How much more is out there? And, how much more will his wife endure? Sad situation to say the least.

posted by dviking at 06:17 PM on May 02, 2008

Where exactly did I "quote him"? You didn't quote him verbatim, but you gave his comment, which came right after "From what I've heard, this is all specualation". And then went on to blame it on Emery for mudslinging. Maybe my reading comprehension is failing me, but it reads as if you're saying there's nothing to it and one reason is what clemens stated. If you didn't mean that, my apologies. Though in that case I have no idea why you mentioned what clemens said. It seems that you've been running from this: Richard Emery in order to make Clemens out to be a scumbag and also to make their case against Clemens that no one should believe what he has to say. This is a classic case of mudslinging that we've see in politics but of course this is just a ploy to misdirect people's attention into believing McNamee and not Clemens. Good job though. From the moment you said it (or perhaps from the moment we knew the claims were true?). Clemens cops to affairs but still denies doping. He will never admit it. Remember, he's only guilty of being too trusting.

posted by justgary at 04:47 PM on May 06, 2008