McNamee had abslutely no reason to lie. If he wasnt telling the truth, he was going to jail, so why would his risk lying and going to jail just to take down Roger Clemens, it doesnt make any sense. Especially when all the other guys he said admitted to it. Roger is lying for sure, he's a total ass hole.
Maybe he's getting paid by someone to take down Clemens. Maybe he has a history and is being blackmailed into taking down Clemens. Just saying there are other possibilities...not quite to black and white. It's certainly hard to see, but that's because if there is something, it's probably hidden well..
you need to read the petition Clemens filed starting at page 10 which includes the transcript of McNamee's interrogation by authorities.
McNamee needs to go ahead and take that 7 figure deal to talk he is going to need it, Roger is going to blast him to no end. DD
I wish the lie detector test idea would just die. If I were Roger Clemens there is no way I would ever take one. http://www.stats.org/stories/lie_detector_tests_may01_06.htm http://www.passapolygraph.com/polygraphquotes.html http://cyber.eserver.org/liedetec.html Lie detector tests are bogus!
I just updated that post with the actual facts from the web. I think people generally believe it isn't admissible because you can beat them. Reality is that they are unreliable both ways.
1) Typically, prosecutors are after suppliers, not users. To make a deal with a supplier that incriminates a USER means you are grandstanding. The feds are not seeking to bring charges against Clemens and they are not trying to milk him for any additional suppliers. Why then, other than public appearances, would they deal away jail time with a drug dealer just to get names of people he says have used? 2) Jason Grimsley was also asked to incriminate Roger Clemens during his bust and refused. This shows a pattern over a few years of the government seeking to get dirt on Roger Clemens despite any physical evidence of guilt. 3) There is no way that McNamee naming a few minor users was going to get him a deal. The government would gain nothing and wouldn't have struck the deal with him. Combining this with their previous attempt to nail Clemens through Grimsley, and it's possible that Clemens was McNamee's only way out. 4) McNamee wasn't facing a few years in jail when he gave up Clemens, but he was potentially facing a big load. If the government had him busted for distributing illegal steroids to the extent it appears they do, the jail time would be significant. He had a LOT of incentive to lie if need be to get out from under that heat. 5) Lastly, McNamee DOES appear to be a very unstable guy. His wife has left him, he's broke, his kid is dying, he has a rape issue in another state, his business was struggling, etc. He seems to be the perfect patsy for the government to turn. A guy under lots of stress now facing a lot of jail time unless he gives the big ticket up.
i'm not saying that's what happened in this case, because i don't know.... but this is exactly what happens quite often. find the weakest in the bunch...separate him out...and scare the piss out of him to get him to say whatever you want.
I just want to clarify that I'm not in any way trying to say the government was trying to get him to lie. I think it's very possible though that they were fishing and McNamee threw Clemens onto the hook to get himself off of it.
I previously quoted this in the thread (or one of the other Clemens threads) but McNamee has come out and said he thought Clemens would pass a lie detector test, which I found very odd to say. I think it lends credibility to Clemens denials.
I agree with you...he's a complete jackass. But there are lots of jackasses, and it's not a precursor to using steroids.
based on what, your own personel experience with him,are your upset because he went to the Yankees and could make more $$...I am curious to why you would say that. Are you jealous of him, that he can pick any job he wants...just curious why you would label him a "prick" Have you ever met the man? It takes a real man such as yourself to define someone else when you havent walked a mile in his shoes Bravo
[ The steroids started in 1997. .[/QUOTE] Wow...we finally have someone who can actually prove this alleagation...please let us know when you will be testifying so I can be sure to watch your testimony...until then dont make remarks that are stated as facts when you have no idea what happened.Please show me ANYTHING stating he used steroids in 1997...oh, you cant...so your just fibbing a bit to make your story credible...got it
Supposedly he was forced into saying Clemens by the Feds to get them to believe him, and think he could give them a big name to go after. What names are bigger than Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens? I don't believe he lied about Clemens being a user. I think everything points to Clemens using, but there is no way to be positive at this point. More than anything, I'm just tired of hearing about steroids. I wanted to know the truth. I didn't want my entire time watching ESPN become about denials and accusations. Say who was accused and that they denied it and be done with it.
