The federal government's steroids in sports witch hunt is sure going well, isn't it? First Barry Bonds. Now Roger Clemens. Who's next? Lance Armstrong? I hope they don't bother. I can already tell you what the jury's verdict in that trial will be. (Here's a hint: it'll be the same as it was in the other two.)
They'll, of course, go after Lance. Because the federal government simply doesn't get it. If the Bonds and Clemens trials have proven anything, it's that the American public, for the most part, doesn't really care whether or not they took steroids. And, ultimately, whether or not they did doesn't really matter. If you were to ask the average American, they'd probably tell you that they think Bonds and Clemens both took performance-enhancing drugs. But they'd also tell you that the government's relentless pursuit of these guys was a tremendous waste of time and money. My feeling has always been that the government should worry about, you know, governing.
I knew going in that Clemens would be found not guilty. That's what happens when your entire case is built on hearsay. From one witness. Who happens to be a complete scumbag. With no credibility. The Clemens legal team was smart. Instead of mounting an actual defense, all they did was attack McNamee. And it worked. It didn't help the prosecution's case that they even admitted McNamee's a sleeze ball. Who injects somebody with something (whatever it is), then saves the disgusting bloody needles for 10 years if their goal isn't to completely screw that person over in the end?
In this battle of "He Said, He Said," the jury decided that they didn't believe McNamee more than they did believe Clemens. The fact that the government paraded an endless array of "experts" that didn't actually conclusively prove anything and made the trial drag on unnecessarily for weeks didn't help, either. All the prosecution did was bore everyone, literally put jury members to sleep, have their star witness get torn to shreads, and provide absoultely no evidence that could definitely prove Roger Clemens took steroids and lied about it.
Meanwhile, there was plenty of reasonable doubt in this case. Only one person claimed firsthand knowledge of Roger Clemens being injected with steroids--Brian McNamee. My feelings on Brian McNamee are well-known. I need a shower after just looking at the guy. Everything he said was contradicted by somebody else. If it's just McNamee's word against one other person's, it might've been easier to believe him. But when every other witness (even some prosecution witnesses) says the opposite, that tells you all you need to know about who's telling the "truth."
Whether the jury members believe Clemens took steroids or not is irrelevant. It was the government's job to prove that he 100 percent DID. And even the biggest Clemens haters out there have to agree that they didn't. When the prosecution fails to prove its case, you have to return a verdit of "Not Guilty." That's the way the American legal system works. (Keep in mind that "Not Guilty" and "Innocent" don't mean the same thing.)
And trying these guys for perjury makes absolutely no sense. Perjury's probably the hardest thing in the world to prove. Nobody knows what went through Roger Clemens' head except for Roger Clemens. When he said that he never took steroids, he believed it. Whether that's the actual truth or not (I'm in the minority in believing that it is), it was the truth in Clemens' eyes. In order to commit perjury, you have to knowingly give false statements. Roger Clemens didn't "know" his statements were false (provided they actually were, which is very much up for debate once more). In his opinion, he was speaking the God's honest truth. Thus, he didn't perjure himself.
I know I'm in the minority, but I've always believed that Roger Clemens was innocent. When he got cut by the Red Sox in 1996, he wanted to prove to them that he wasn't "done." So he worked even harder. And even during the whole "did he or didn't he" debate, nobody ever questioned that work ethic. That's what made him so successful. Like Clemens, Randy Johnson was dominant into his 40s. Randy Johnson has never come under suspicion. If it's possible that Randy Johnson did it all naturally, isn't it possible that Roger Clemens did, too?
This whole process is finally over after four years. Next year will be five since Roger Clemens played his last Major League game. Ordinarily, his numbers, longevity and sheer dominance would make Clemens a lock for Cooperstown. But there are Hall of Fame voters who refuse to ever vote for any player even suspected of steroid use. That's a debate for January (when Barry Bonds also makes his debut on the Hall of Fame ballot). For now, though, while he might never win over the court of public opinion, Roger Clemens did win over a jury of his peers.
It's kinda funny to think that after 354 Major League wins, the biggest victory of Roger Clemens' career came in a Washington, DC, courtroom. The sad irony of the Mitchell Report and the Steroids Era.
No comments:
Post a Comment