O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Andrew</b><p>I just finished watching the Roger Clemens interview on 60 minutes. Just curious what others thought of it? To me he looks more guilty then ever. The main question that stood out to me was when asked about a lie detector test, he was very quick to say they aren't always that great. Also hes "officially" retired for a 4th? time now. For someone whos been infront of the media of New York, for someone whos been infront of millions for a World Series, for someone who has done interview after interview for papers, magazines and tv, he just looked to fidgity and to nervous to be innocent.<br /><br />Your thoughts?<br /><br />Andrew<br /><br />Edited to spell ClemEns, Lol

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Pitiful. He and his representatives have tin ears. What an awful bit of spin control.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>My wife thought he was telling the truth. I thought he was lying. I think he wants to get to the Hall of Fame, and steroid users probably won't. Let's see if McNamee now sues him.<br /><br />And his name is spelled "Clemens"

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>CN</b><p> As a member of law enforcement for 23 years and who has attended the FBI interogation school as well as others and conducted thousands of interviews and obtained countless confessions it was clear that Clemens was lying. Besides the lie detector segment which was probably the most obvious there were at least 4 other segements in which he was lying.(I was informally taking notes while watching). As an experienced interrogater body language as well as verbal language can tell the interrogater about a persons truthfulness. I watched this interview as a training excercise for my job and took my own prior opinions out and I can tell you that Clemens was lying. CN

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Too many excuses.<br /><br />IMO if these guys would just come forward and tell the truth they'd be better off in the end. McGwire's taking the 5th in front of Congress ruined him...taking the 5th pretty much means "I'm guilty" so why not just say it and get it out of the way?

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Scot Reader</b><p><br />Why would McNamee have told the truth about Pettitte and lied about Clemens? Doesn't make sense.<br /><br />I didn't bother to watch the 60 Minutes charade.<br /><br />Pathetic. I used to like Roger.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Brad</b><p>His record should be striped, plan and simple!

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>1st, I will say I was never a fan of Clemens. As a Yankee fan I obviously disliked him when he was with the Red Sox. And,<br /> when the Yankees picked him up at the expense of David Wells (a guy who I was a great fan of), it really ticked-me-off.<br /> So, to repeat.....I am no great fan of Clemens.<br /><br />HOWEVER.......<br /><br />No. 1.....The Mitchell Report is a SHAM ! Mitchell is a so-called independent investigator who has been ass-<br />ociated with the Red Sox organization going back to when he was a useless Senator. How many Red Sox<br /> player's were on his Report ? ?<br /><br />No. 2.....60 Minutes is not an objective News outfit. I don't trust them to report what is true. And, yes, Lie<br />Detector's are not 100% accurate and that was an agenda-driven question by that old "prune face" Wallace.<br /><br />No 3.....Clemens' (and also Pettitte's) trainer is trying to save his ass from prison, so he is telling them any-<br />thing to plea bargain. It turned out that Pettitte's use was not steroids. I choose to believe Clemens' side<br /> of this story.<br /><br />T-Rex TED<br /><br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Clemens was lying when he said he has been a workout machine his entire career also....I still remember him coming to Spring Training in his final season with the Red Sox and watching him try to climb over a chain link fence...he looked like a fat tub of goo ($1 to David Letterman).

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>I have three children....<br />I sure would like you to teach me some of those interrogation skills!<br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Ted you could have shortened your response to "Democrats and CBS News are all liars" and saved a lot of typing.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>CN -- I agree. I've cross examined enough people to know quickly who is lying. This one was not even close.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Why must you view everything thru "politically tinted" glasses ?<br /><br />Is Clemens a Republican....so, I choose to believe him ? <br /><br />Is Wallace a Democrat.....so, I think he has an agenda ?<br /><br /><br />Hey guy, the first President I voted for was JFK. I also voted for LBJ and Carter....and Harry Truman is one of my favorites.<br />And, a few Repubs. in between.<br /><br /> I am neither a Repub. or a Democ.....but, a person who tends to be Conservative and believes in Traditional values.<br /><br />TED Z

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Scot Reader</b><p><br />Ted,<br /><br />On your points #1 and #2, I am no fan of George Mitchell and don't have blinders on when it comes to 60 Minutes reporting. However, they are not at issue here. At issue are Clemens behavior and apparent lack of veracity. On your point #3, McNamee did not link Pettitte to steroids--only to HGH. And he turned out to be correct in this respect.<br /><br />Scot<br /><br /><br /><br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Sorry Ted, but your attacking the messenger is right out of the political handbook. You voted for Jimmy Carter?? Not many will admit to that one. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Alan U</b><p>It will be interesting to see if he is willing to testify in front of Congress.<br /><br />-Alan

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Al Simeone</b><p>CN,<br />I also tend to agree with you ,his body language was just horrible. You could just see the nervousness comming from him. Something I found very troubling was was he said himself , for a man with his work ethic (which I believe was second to none in his training) why would you say that in the asking of the question about the use of vioxx that you were taking them like "candy"! And knowing that it was linked to heart damage, then saying that the use of steroids is just a "quick fix" you dont see any horns growing out of me do you? If he had that much respect for hard work then pills should never should have entered the equation. I think Mike Wallace asked some very good questions and Clemens danced around alot of them.<br />Ted Z. I will also echo Dan Your comments sometimes are mind boggling !!!!!!!!!!!!!

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Yes, it's tough admitting I voted for Carter (big mistake); but, I try to be truthful. Speaking about<br /> the "truth", none of us really know whether Clemens is telling the truth or his trainer. But, I see that<br /> McNamee is in big trouble and he will do whatever it takes to avoid prison.<br /><br />The fact that he even brought Pettitte into this fray shows how desperate he is.<br /><br />Where does Pettitte go to recover his reputation now, since Mitchell read his name in his litany of<br /> steroid offenders ?<br /><br />I do recall the "demise" of a once robust Lyle Alzado and how steroids can cripple you as you age.<br />I do not think Clemens would subject himself to such debilitating risks. And, please don't confuse<br />my words in defense of Clemens....as, I said I am not a fan of his. I have not forgotten that night<br /> he threw that ball at Piazza's head. That was one of the most sickening moments in Base Ball.<br /><br />Finally, I will fault Clemens for going on 60 Minutes with his story. It didn't make him look good and<br /> we don't know how much of that was due to 60 Minute's editing department.<br /><br />T-Rex TED

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Two definites: Clemens will testify in front of Congress; and Clemens will lie in front of Congress.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>DD</b><p>Most people with an addiction, be it drugs, alcohol, or smoking, or people that take an illegal substance for whatever reason, will downplay or rationalize the effects as it pertains to them. If that wasn't the case, no one would smoke, take drugs, or do steroids (except in the case of real medicinal value).<br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>CN</b><p> Any advanced interrogater or cross examiner knows the key signs to look for to determine if a person is lying,Clemens was not even close. I wonder if the interview was controlled how Clemens would have responded. His counsel would probably not let him interview unless they controlled the interview. I respect Mike Wallace for what he does but at 89 years old there is only so much time he could push Clemens on the issue. I am sure that Jeff or myself would like to question Clemens in our professional capacity as we could go on for hours and would probably get a totally different response from this fraud. My guess is that if not granted immunity Clemens will take the 5th before Congress. CN

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>CN -- for what it's worth, 60 Mins does not give its subjects any control over interviews (as I so painfully learned as a younger lawyer; if not for the sympathy of a kind hearted producer they would have made a complete ass out of me via a Steve Kroft interview). <br /><br />Now try to imagine Clemens taking the 5th before Congress after claiming he has nothing to hide! Good lord, professional athletes away from their games can be such complete idiots.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>This is what Roger Clemens looked like to me tonight.<br /><br />Nathan Thurm lawyer for the Minkman Schnauze Company<br /><img src="http://snltranscripts.jt.org/84/pics/84f60minutes3.jpg">

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Hahha! Dan, there's got to be a youtube of him....

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>In addition to the tell-tale eye movement, this question was the real clincher...<br /><br />When Wallace asked if he would take a polygraph, Rockbottom replied something like, "I don't know if those are even accurate." <br /><br />What?.. I would think a "Hell yes" would be the first thing outtas my mouth.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>George</b><p>Forget it.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Ken W.</b><p>Take the political discussions elsewhere, please.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>Referring to the pre-drug testing era in MLB, a player can (and does often does) say "I never failed a drug test." To which a fan can accurately reply, "You never passed a drug test." It's hard to find meaning, much less 'proof,' in the fact that someone never fail a test that didn't exist much less was taken. I never lost an Olympics pole vaulting competition, which, trust me, doesn't make me an expert pole vaulter. I've also never lost an Indy 500 or a Miss Argentina pageant, failed the Harvard medical exams or lost a single round against James Jeffries. <br /><br />"I couldn't have done it officer. At the time of the murder I was not losing the Russian National piano competition, and, as we all know, the Russian National violin competition takes place in Moscow."<br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>CN</b><p> Jeff I should have clarified what I meant by control. I didn,t mean to insinuate that Wallace cleared the questions ahead of time with Clemens but the way I meant control was that the interview was done at Clemens house with Wallace sitting on a chair with ROCKET on the back thus giving Clemens at least some comfort level. CN

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>CN- You are spot on with the body language observations. Like Jeff, I have spent a lifetime cross-examining witnesses in criminal cases and the body language signs of falsified testimony were there. <br />Also, polygraph test results are inadmissible in many states (mine included), but may be admitted if both sides stipulate to its admission. My experiences have been that if the examiner is independent and truly impartial and well-trained, the results are very accurate, so much depends on the examiner. When Clemens replied to the question of whether he would be willing to submit to a polygraph test, I agree with a previous poster, he should have said (he was under no obligation) "hell yes, as long as we can use an examiner who is well-trained, experienced and impartial, and if so, it will prove I am telling the truth."<br />If Pettite had not admitted the trainer was corect, that he was injected twice with HGH as claimed, Clemens believability would be higher, IMHO.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Dan P.</b><p>I watched clemens on 60 Minutes also. 2 comments:<br /><br />1) the last time I saw dancing like that was in a Fred Astaire/Ginger Rogers movie<br /><br />2) in court "I plead the 5th" is the same as saying "I'm guilty but don't want to lie"

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Nathan Thurm<br /><object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FOLBQxk72NY&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FOLBQxk72NY&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>JT Burtchaell</b><p>I think he was lying too, but I hate overconfidence. <br /><br />From The Forensic Examiner, Spring 2006<br /><br />By Michael G. Aamodt, PhD, FACFEI, DSPCP<br />and Heather Custer, MS<br /><br />Abstract<br />A meta-analysis was conducted to determine if there were individual<br />differences in the ability to detect deception. On the basis<br />of 108 studies covering 16,537 subjects, the results indicated that<br />confidence, age, experience, education, and sex were not<br />significantly related to accuracy in detecting deception. The study also<br />found that “professional lie catchers” such as police officers, detectives,<br />judges, and psychologists (M = 55.51%, N = 2,685) were no more accurate at detecting deception than were students and other citizens (M = 54.22%, N = 11,647).<br /><br />JT

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Ken McMillan</b><p>he did the drugs......No doubt about it. <br /><br />Ken

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>Tennis star Martina Hingis was recently suspended for testing positive for cocaine. A sportswriter said he was waiting for her to say, "I thought I was snorting Vitamin B12"<br /><br />Evidently, the surest way to erradicate steroids in baseball is to have players quit taking B12.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Tom</b><p>I have not been a criminal defense attorney for a lifetime, yet, only 27 years so far. I disagree with Bob. Having shredded the testimony of more than one polygraph examiner to the point of making juries giggle at them, I do not believe there is enough "science" in polygraph examination to even raise it to the level of "junk science". If polygraphs were scientifically reliable, they would be admissible in the federal courts (they are not) and in most state courts (they are not). That being said, I agree that it was obvious from his demeanor that Clemens was not being truthful. He will either lie to Congress or take the 5th, a lose-lose situation. Roger should have come clean as Pettitte did. He might have been forgiven eventually. Now he has put his friend in a very tough spot. What will Pettitte do if asked about Clemens?

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>keyway</b><p>Amazing how some of you guys are now interigation experts. His eyes, the look on his face, his movements. Give me a break!!!!! He said he took loads of viox before he knew it was bad, so did I. Whats to lie about there. I don't like Clemens and never did but I hardly think he convicted himself in this interview. Todays News, Clemens is suing. Good for him. As he said, everyone today is guilty before the facts.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Corey R. Shanus</b><p>Why do you say that in order to avoid prison Clemen's trainer needed to lie about Clemens? From what's been reported, all he had to do was tell the truth, the substance about what he said being irrelevant as long as it was the truth. I was a bit surprised Wallace did not follow up on this point. Clemen's response was that, as Ted says, the trainer was motivated to lie. Wallace let it go at that, which I think will fuel accusations that he was too soft on Clemens. <br /><br />Being an avid Yankees fan, I remember watching him in the late 90's and taking particular notice how puffy his face looked. This was before the whole performance-enhancing drug scandal was in the headlines so I wasn't focusing on his possible use of such drugs. I was just noticing something that, to a nondoctor, seemed strange for such a well-conditioned muscular athlete. Clemens in his interview made particular reference that his body did not change. I'm curious if anyone else noticed anything about his physical appearance when he was with the Yankees that roused suspicions. <br /><br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>I'll be anything Clemens has already taken and failed a polygraph test -- don't you think he and his lawyers would have loved to waive results of such a test all over the media? And if he hasn't taken one yet it's because he knows he'll fail.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>After McGwire tanked in his first year of eligibility for the Hall, every athlete with Hall of Fame aspirations and oversized bodies has been put on the defensive. They know that if it is even assumed they took steroids it probably means a one-way ticket to Palookaville.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jerry Rucker</b><p> According to this mornings Houston chronicle, who's reporters interviewed Clemens in Rusty Hardin's Office Yesterday afternoon. Clemens states that he had an hour long conversation with McNamee last friday. First I am shocked that Mcnamee's lawyer would permit such a conversation. This conversation was most likely taped by Clemens Legal team and I'm sure that McNamee told Roger that he was pressured to turn on him. Which Roger and his lawyers can use to spin in his defense. But unless McNamme was pressured to lie about Clemens it makes no difference whether he was pressured or not.<br /> I think the defamation Lawsuit filed by Clemens is a ploy so he won't have to appear in front of Congress. Now he can just say, my lawyers have advised me not to talk about this.<br /> Another thing, On the question from Wallace about the Lie Detector test. I think he probally has already taken one and the results were not to favorable or they would be waving it for everyone to see.<br />JMHO<br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Tom</b><p>I have no trust in polygraph tests as proof of anything. However, Clemens and his people are interested in public and media perception now, not about truth or proof. So, I agree with Jeff. If Clemens could pass a polygraph, he would have done so. It is likely that his lawyers ran him on a private polygraph test and he did not pass.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Steve Murray</b><p>"It is likely that his lawyers ran him on a private polygraph test and he did not pass."<br /><br />But if this true why would his lawyers file a frivolous lawsuit?<br /><br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>I'd bet heavily that he hasn't taken a polygraph. Any such test would be discoverable in the defamation action. His attorney is far too calculating to have made that mistake.<br /><br />I agree with Tom, there are good reasons why polygraphs are inadmissible and I would love to cross-examine any polygraph examiner. So Roger's failure to jump right into that fire means little to me. Personally, I can easily imagine a scenario where Roger, as a lay person, initially thought it a great idea to go the lie detector route, but had his lawyer tell him how it was largely a no-win situation--fail it and you're cooked, pass it and people will claim the test was unreliable or the examiner hand-picked. <br /><br />I do not believe his interview to be all that telling. Yes he certainly looked uncomfortable and fidgety, but he also seemed genuinely frustrated and angry. He maintained eye contact for the most part, and he looked to me anxious to interrupt Wallace and almost as if he was gritting his teeth to maintain composure on occasion. I've had clients look pitiful in uncontested default proceedings where I am spoon-feeding the questions. Some people get nervous and stumble all over themselves in certain situations, and would look dubious even telling you that the sun rises in the East. I've also had other folks who I damn well knew were lying and looked as calm and believable as your grandma. Of course, you just feed those types with more rope to hang themselves, either their own inconsistent statements or other evidence. In that regard, Wallace could have done a better job asking questions that could be tested through other testimony or evidence, pinning him down on how frequently McNamee gave him his B12 and pain shots and who was present, where, etc., asking why such innocent shots were administered in his apartment and not at the team's facilities, i.e. stuff that is somewhat ancillary but which can lead to other avenues of truth finding. Of course, that is not necessarily his job and he had time and editorial constraints, but it would have been nice.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jerry Rucker</b><p>Another thing, It is my understanding and correct me if I'm wrong but Lidocaine is a joint pain medicine that is suppose to be injected in the joints and not in the derraire.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Richard Simon</b><p>I doubt if Clemens will sue and open himself up to depositions. Lying under oath is a crime.<br />And also in regards to the lydocaine, a letter to the editor in the NY Times, from a doctor, stated that lydocaine is a local anesthetic. If Clemens got it injected in his butt, then he did so because his butt was hurting, it would not help his knee, elbow, arm or any other part of his crooked,lying body.<br />--<br><br>I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.<br />Unknown author <br />--<br />We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.<br />No retreat baby, no surrender.<br />The Boss

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Darren</b><p>Lidocaine is a local anesthetic with a short duration of action used mainly as a numbing medicine prior to sutures, but also used in joint injections.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>JK</b><p>"I doubt if Clemens will sue and open himself up to depositions."<br /><br />Guess again: <a href="http://assets.espn.go.com/media/pdf/080107/mlb_clemens.pdf" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://assets.espn.go.com/media/pdf/080107/mlb_clemens.pdf</a><br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>A question is if Clemens actually did take only B12 and Lidocane and feels the trainer is mistaken, why didn't he simply tell this to Mitchell when Mitchell invited him and his lawyer to give their input? Is it just me, or would this have been the most obvious and sanest avenue to impart the knowledge if accurate, in particular considering Mitchell has said he removed a player's name from the document after the player provided counter evidence. Refusing to offer this information months earlier to a respected former judge in private quarters, but coming out with a YouTube video and staging a 60 Minutes interview in your kitchen is, to say the least, an odd and circuitous way to impart information if the information is true, simple and shows your innocence. And, considering the principle of Occam's Razor, there are always reasons someone, and lawyer, forgoes the simplest, most obvious and seemingly most self-beneficial way of doing things.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Steve Murray</b><p>What I find interesting about the Complaint is that it is neither signed by nor attested to by the Plaintiff.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>JK</b><p>There is generally no requirement that a complaint be signed or verified by the plaintiff.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Wil Jordan</b><p>Roger Clemens is all about himself just like Barry Bonds. They were great players prior to using steriods. Instead of relying on their natural abilities to take them to the HOF and to make millions of dollars they chose to cheat. He is trying to repair the damage done by the Mitchell Report by telling a mutitude of stories that don't make sense. Anyone that saw the interview could tell he was not telling the truth. Clemens just dosen't get it the public owes him nothing and with good reason. Fans are very forgiving when you admit what you did but if he continues on his present course he will end up like Pete Rose and others who have chosen not to accept the consequences of their actions.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>As I recall, the question posed of Clemens was whether McNamee ever injected him with anything, not where did he inject him nor whether he injected it in his butt. The answer therefore appears true, or at least consistent--he received B-12 and lidocaine injections. Clemens went on to state how he still uses those same injections for his joints, and was not evasive in that regard. No way he was unprepared for that question, and he had to know it would immediateley be shown that the injection is administered in the joints--hell, even I knew that. So I think some are making too much of that answer as being an obvious lie, when it appears consistent.<br /><br />David, I understood Clemens to say he would have gone to Mitchell immediately if he knew what McNameee had said, and that he wasn't told of the allegations. My gut feeling is that all of these guys opted out of talking to Mitchell more out of a fear that they would be asked to rat out their teammates (not that I believe that to be justifiable) than out of a concern for confronting damaging evidence.<br /><br />I have not read the Complaint, but understand that there is at least one very curious allegation--that McNamee was forced not only to just tell the truth, but to give up Clemens as a means of avoiding or reducing his punishment. How that plays out will be fascinating, IMO.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>That's a lot of absolutely false statements Clemens is saying McNamee made....I guess McNamee will have to prove he made them, somehow?

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>Obviously, whoever advised all the players not to cooperate did them a disservice. Interestingly, the only player to cooperate had his name removed from the list as he provided evidence he was not guilty. Fair to presume this player chose to defy the Players Union wishes as he felt he was not guilty. <br /><br />The problem for the Players Union is that the drug rules and laws are, directly or indirectly, coming via Congress (Congress effecting drug laws, who would've thunk?). Whatever the Union's reasons, having advised the players to not cooperate with Mitchell not only won't sit well with Congress as a whole, but may help lead to more testing and harsher penalties.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Corey R. Shanus</b><p>IF what Todd just reported is true -- that in addition to telling the truth, to save his skin McNamee also had to include as part of the "truth" an allegation of steroid/HGH use by Clemens -- the impact of that revelation on public opinion could be monumental. Suddenly McNamee is given a huge motivation to lie about Clemens, seriously impacting his credibility. I would think in relatively short order someone with first-hand knowledge of the truth of this allegation (e.g., Mitchell/the Feds) will add his/her voice to the mix.<br /><br />If that allegation is forcefully denied and in fact untrue, it would seem to demonstrate how desperate Clemens is, going to any lengths to try to respond head-on to the most troubling aspect of his predicament -- Why would McNamee lie?

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>steve</b><p>At a critical point in the interview, my TV went kinda fuzzy both visually and audibly - for maybe a 15 second response from Clemens.<br /><br />Was my TV an isolated local reception case, or did you folks pick up on the "scramble."<br /><br />If so, obviously edited on prurpose, hmmm. <br /><br />steve

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Clemens would be a whole lot more believable if his good buddy Pettitte hadn't admitted that McNamee gave him HGH.<br /><br />Clemens has completely screwed his Hall of Fame chances by taking this route...Andy Pettitte will come back and pitch next year and no one will say anything. If Clemens had said basically the same thing that Pettitte did that he tried it, it didn't work and he never did it again then he would be headed to the Hall.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>The ability of this forum to entertain should not be underestimated!!<br /><br />This recurring MLB/Vitamin B12 episode has made me reflect back upon what my parents and doctors always told me while growing up back in semi-rural Chicagoland during the troubled '70s...They all said to me, "Jason, remember to always take your vitamins...-through a needle in the butt."<br /><br />I just don't really recall that last phrase though. Hmph, I guess I just misheard them cuz it must have been there. I mean, that's what our major league heroes do, so it must be right!

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>shane leonard</b><p>I like Clemens and I think he is an awesome pitcher, but I heard rumors of this back four years ago when a friend of mine was down watching his son play during spring training with Clemens. My friend was on the front row watching Clemens pitch and he was having a hard time hitting 86 mph. The statement made by someone with the organization was, "he hasn't had his shots yet." <br /><br />Pretty positive they were not talking about the flu shots.<br /><br />Shane<br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>JK</b><p>Jeff may disagree <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> but after reading these posts its a good thing we require actual evidence to convict someone and we dont merely convict people based on nothing other than hearsay and what your friends did.<br /><br />As for "the scramble" - I love it. Now Clemens has the power to scramble the television signals. Just awesome. As long as we are going to make this into a conspiracy theory, I've heard through a friend of a friend's uncle's girlfriend that Clemens is actually a CIA assasin and that when the guy with the "organization" stated "clemens hasn't taken his shots yet" he was actually referring to a CIA hit. <br /><br /><br />Edited to add - this post should not in any way be interpreted as my supporting clemens. If he did it, he should suffer the consequences. However, sorry, I dont believe you can tell someone is lying simply based on their appearance/body language (hey all you law enforcement guys - when someone is believed to have committed the crime but shows no signs of lying while denying it, do you let them go? Have people proclaiming their innocence ever been wrongly convicted?). I like to see something a little more along the lines of evidence before someone is convicted.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>JK,<br /><br />You're confusing Roger Clemens with Chuck Barris. Don't worry. Happens all the time.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>D.C. Markel</b><p>Here is one excerpt from the 60 Minutes interview that was so incredibly lame regarding why Clemens claims he couldn't have taken steroids:<br /><br />Quote from Clemens during interview: "If he's [McNamee] putting that stuff up in my body, if what he's saying which is totally false, if he's doing that to me, I should have a third ear coming out of my forehead." Later Clemens goes on to say, "Why didn't I break down? Why didn't my tendons turn to dust? That's all it's good for. It's a quick fix.<br /><br />If anyone believes this is even remotely true, then this proves no one in baseball has ever taken steroids because players like Canseco, Giambi, and other who have confessed to steroid have no third ear on their forehead or tendons of dust.<br /><br /><br /><br />Here's another segment where Clemens is totally clueless regarding coming up with a credible explanation why McNamee had to testify against him:<br /><br />Mike Wallace states, "George Mitchell says he believes McNamee and this is why: McNamee got caught up in a federal steroids investigation, and the federal prosecutors agreed not to charge him if he told the truth about his involvement with steroids. But they would charge him if he gave any false information. So Mitchell says McNamee had strong incentives to tell the truth," Wallace says. "What did McNamee gain by lying?"<br /><br />"Evidently not going to jail," Clemens says.<br /><br />"Jail time for what?" Wallace asks<br /><br />"Well, I think he's been buying and movin' steroids," Clemens says. <br /><br /><img src="http://www.24hourforums.com/images/emoticons/bang.gif"> <img src="http://www.24hourforums.com/images/emoticons/bang.gif"><br /><img src="http://www.24hourforums.com/images/emoticons/bang.gif"><br /><img src="http://www.24hourforums.com/images/emoticons/bang.gif"><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Here's the transcript of the interview:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/03/60minutes/main3671585.shtml" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/03/60minutes/main3671585.shtml</a><br /><br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>All McNamee had to do was keep his mouth shut about Clemens if he wanted to avoid the media firestorm that has been created -- simply put, McNamee had no incentive to name Clemens. Pettitte's corroboration is killer to Clemens' denials. As for McNamee speaking with Clemens, I'm stunned -- is it possible that both Clemens AND McNamee are getting awful legal advice?<br /><br />I still think Clemens took a polygraph test and failed. Todd, don't put anything past Clemens and his lawyer in this instance: it would have been a nice bit of PR if he could have waived those results around. When I have a client that is telling the truth about an issue, I often have them take the test and when they pass, show it to the feds and insist they polygraph their cooperator on the same issue. That request often results in a charge being dropped. All Mike Wallace had to do last night was follow up with: "have you taken such a test already?" He was too busy asking Roger to swear he was telling the truth. <br /><br />As for filing the lawsuit, Clemens is out of his mind as he will simply propogate this steroid story forever and ever and ever. I'm amazed that any lawyer could give such poor advice; the only way to rationalize it is to assume that the lawyer was blinded by Clemens' celebrity and stopped thinking.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>PC</b><p>A few things to point out about the Mitchell Report:<br /><br />(1) Nobody was granted immunity to testify as part of Mitchell's investigation -- Mitchell was not in a position to grant immunity to anyone, only to promise to try and keep information and identities confidential (if requested to do so), to the extent he could do so. I am not aware of McNamee having immunity from federal prosecution, but if he has it, he didn't get it from Mitchell, because he couldn't get it from Mitchell.<br /><br />(2) This may state the obvious, but the Mitchell Report reports only what was told to Mitchell (and his team). And the reason almost no current players cooperated with the investigation was because they were advised by the Players Association not to cooperate, primarily because Mitchell could not guarantee confidentiality or immunity (which, I suppose, is a fair concern). Read the annexes to the Michell Report -- there are two memos, one from Mitchell and the other from Donald Fehr, addressed to the players on this point.<br /><br />(3) Anyone who dismisses the Mitchell Report simply because of Mitchell's former ties to the Red Sox shows only that the Mitchell Report was not read, or not read closely. There are literally dozens of references to the Red Sox, Red Sox players and Red Sox management, including some embarrassing correspondence from Theo Epstein around the time the Sox acquired Gagne. In one section, the report indicates that 23 members of the Red Sox organization were interviewed about a particular incident involving Paxton Crawford ... not surprisingly, all 23 played dumb. The Red Sox appear as bad as any other team, and worse than most.<br /><br />Read the report.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Tom- perhaps I did not clearly state my positon on polygraphs. I agree that in the hands of an unskilled and/or unimpartial examiner they can be a disaster. We routinely counseled our clients NOT to agree to take polygraph examinations except in the most extreme sitautions when there were extenuating circumstances that justified their use. Of the several examiners in this area, there is only one examiner whom I trusted enough to use. <br />That said, I would reiterate that in the hands of a well trained, competent and impartial and neutral examiner they can be accurate, not infallible, but approaching trustworthiness. <br />As far as their infallibility goes, (the flip side of the coin), I once represented a serial killer who was adept at "fooling" the examiners (more than one was given), and was able to provide incorrect answers which appeared as truthful responses. <br />They are not 100% effective and there are too many variables from the examiner himself, the questions asked, etc. and that is why the results will probably never be admitted in federal court and most states. <br />I also agree that Clemens' attorneys probably explored the possibility of having a "friendly" examiner give the Rocket a test and if the results had been positive that he was being truthful, would have trumpeted the results from the rooftop.<br />tbob

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>I can see how you might submit your criminal defense clients to a polygraph as a means of obtaining a dismissal, although at least here in AZ the State won't bite unless a second exam is taken before their polygrapher, and even then I believe it happens infrequently. However, as I understand it, you have no downside in doing so in the criminal arena--he passes and you waive it all around, he fails, you have no duty to disclose it ever happened. If I'm wrong about that, please advise.<br /><br />In Clemens' case, you have an obligation to disclose the failed poly in the civil action. Even if inadmissible at trial, it's discoverable and a matter of public record (absent some stipulated protective order that likely will not be forthcoming), and since Roger is far more interested in swaying the public and clearing his name than winning a lawsuit against a marginally collectible defendant, he proceeds at great risk in going forward with a polygraph.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Well, I didn't see the whole interview, nor am I an expert at polygraphs or determining who is lying, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. That said:<br /><br />I do think it is relavent that the trainer making the accusation is basically getting off with no punishment for his crimes.<br /><br />It would be interesting to know the circumstances of how he ended up not being Clemen's trainer? Was there a bad split personally? I would think the Yankees could confirm or deny that they had Clemens take the joint shots that he mentioned.<br /><br />Lets remember that Clemens was named last year by one of the California papers as being a "user" and they have since retracted their story. Is it possible that his trainer had read that story and to save his own skin throws Clemen's name out there thinking that he was doing it anyways and he's a big name and it will help me with the feds? I'd say yes its possible.<br /><br />I also think that Clemen's is a very very competitive person. Can I imagine him hearing that others are doing something that helps them and he decides to do it also - yes I can.<br /><br />However, If I had spent my entire life doing something very well and one day someone claimed that I had done so illegally, or by false pretenses, or by cheating - ONE person whom I had a falling out with - I don't think I'd be too happy. Nor would I be in the best mindset for interviews, or answering my thoughts on polygraphs, etc (no matter how well prepped). I'd be pretty damn mad and feeling that there wasn't much I could do. <br /><br />We live in a country where you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. All MLB players were told not to speak with Mitchell, and union members generally follow the advice of their union. One uncollaborated story from someone looking to avoid jail isn't what I'd consider "beyond a reasonable doubt".<br /><br />For MLB players unfortunately it only takes one bad apple...and baseball has had many bad apples...and there will always be doubts and whispers - just like there are in track & field and cycling. If Clemens didn't do it then I feel really bad for him because forever his reputation is basically tainted, perhaps gone. I strongly feel that something more than one man's story should be required for that.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Fred C</b><p>All we can do is hope that Roger is telling the truth and that he can some how prove it. Do I think it's possible that Clemens took PHDs? - Yes, I think it's possible. Do I think so? I'm hoping he didn't. <br /><br />Why not polygraph both Clemens and the trainer? I know that stuff isn't admissable as evidence but it would be interesting to see if they both come out positive, negative or opposite. It wouldn't prove anything but it sure would be interesting. If Clemens is not telling the truth I bet he is praying that the trainer didn't save a syringe he used.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Sadly, the court of public opinion does not employ the beyond a reasonable doubt standard. See the Chicago Black Sox, acquitted in court...convicted in history.<br /><br />Here's my rhetorical question to everyone out there who was just accused of a horrific crime of which you were 100% innocent: if you were offered a polygraph test to be administered by an agreed-upon tester -- and it would clear your name and you were told it was 99% accurate -- would you hesitate? Of course, not. Being able to twist a polygraph examiner on cross examination does not necessarily mean the test is a joke -- it just means that reasonable doubt can be raised about the test. This is the sort of fact that has really hurt Clemens -- why wouldn't he run to it? And wouldn't it be funny if McNamee took a test and waived it around? If I was his attorney I'd do it in a second. Also, Pettite's corroboration of McNamee is devastating to Clemens, plain and simple.<br /><br />All that being said, if McNamee was pressured into specifically fingering Clemens I'd feel different to some degree.<br /><br />I just read that McNamee's lawyers were unaware that their client spoke to Clemens. Seems like they've really got a grip on their client.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p><br />"I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>A polygraph is 99% accurate? I didn't know that...

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Leon, I was just throwing that number out there. The success rates of polygraphs exams are hotly disputed. I would venture to guess they are about 90% or more accurate, probably 95% but there is no real way to measure this due to the variety of ways they are administered and other variables.<br /><br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I could see me being one of the 10% when it was wrong....As for Clemens....I didn't see the interview yesterday so don't know with respect to that. I hope he didn't do it. He looked convincingly innocent in a news clip, albeit only about a 1 minute one, today on TV......

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Patrick McHugh</b><p>to know he is lying. Lidocaine is a numbing agent and nothing more. So unless his ass was sore from pitching (ha ha!) why would he need this stuck in his ass. B12 Shots are always given in the arm. Why would he be given this shot in the behind? Steroids are almost always shot in the backside. Also notice the last few years he would finish a 1 year real time contract after closing day never sign until the following year. This is because when a player is under contract he can be drug tested at anytime offseason included. So come november 1st not under any contract meaning no test no risk just start amping up like crazy stop on april 1st wait 2 weeks for drugs to clear and then sign nice 1 season contract. After 5 months of steroids training and eating you can pitch next 4-5 months with out the juice and be very very good. That my friends is how it is done!

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>....and somewhere....Barry Bonds is smiling!!!!

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>"Here's my rhetorical question to everyone out there who was just accused of a horrific crime of which you were 100% innocent: if you were offered a polygraph test to be administered by an agreed-upon tester -- and it would clear your name and you were told it was 99% accurate -- would you hesitate? Of course, not."<br /><br /><br /><br />even though it was a rhetorical, I will answer.<br /><br />I most probably would hesitate to take a lie detector test.<br /><br />I am not sure I would pass any polygraph - ever. I get a bit nervous when I am accused. I tend to think of the implication of a question - and then say to myself - 'oh man they think I did such and such.' I never took my pulse during accusatory questions - but I am sure it jumps on the implications of a question - and I would make that little needle dance around.<br /><br />I am not making a commentary on Roger Clemens. Just saying that I am doomed if I ever had to take a polygraph.

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Joe, there are baselines established with polygraphs to take that nervousness into account.<br /><br />That being said, you ARE from Staten Island and, therefore, never above suspicion. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>I know you enjoy what you do....<br /><br />but something tells me you would also have a blast as a prosecutor.<br /><br />

O/T - Clemens On 60 Minutes
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Joe, that's a dirty little secret of mine. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> I think I'd enjoy it but eventually I'd miss the challenge of winning cases when the odds of victory are so slim.