Do you believe Brian McNamee?

[LSN80]

McNamee, of course, is the former trainer of Roger Clemens, who(Clemens) is currently on trial for lying to Congress in denying his use of Anabolic Steroids. Under oath, Clemens testified before Congress that he never used steroids. The allegations of steroid use were made mostly by McNamee, who has now become a somewhat reluctant witness against Clemens. In August of 2010, Clemens was indicted on six felony counts, mostly surrounding perjury and obstruction of justice. His trial is currently under way.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-0517-clemens-trial-20120517,0,3296258.story

The legitimacy of McNamee's testimony has come into question during Clemens trial, specifically as McNamee has said that some memories have become clearer over time, as in testimony he had previously not given. McNamee was Clemens former strength trainer, and testified today about a conversation he allegedly had in 2004 with Roger Clemens. McNamee said:

" In early 2004, he(Clemens) asked whether I still had a source to obtain steroids. He told me: I want to get really huge, I want to get strong."

\
But the legitimacy of the testimony is being brought into question, because in the initial investigation in which McNamee was questioned, he failed to mention said conversation. McNamee simply chalked it up to bad memory, and that as new details have emerged from other sources, it's triggered new memories in him. McNamee's credibility will undoubtably be the key into determining Clemens guilt or innocence, and Clemens attorney Rusty Hardin knows it. He was veracious in his questioning and attacking of McNamee's credibility. Here are some of the snippets he leveled at McNamee:

Is it true that ever since you began making these accusations about Mr. Clemens, your memory and versions of what happened and details have sort of evolved?"

McNamee, on the stand, acknowledged that it had.

Have you ever lied to investigators, Mr. McNamee?

Again, McNamee affirmed that he had. McNamee had begun to write a book, one he has not finished or published, and Hardin attacked him there as well.

You remember little details all the way back to 1998 ... but you have to have me show you the cover of your book before you know what's on it. Mistake, bad memory, or lie, which is it?

Far and away, McNamee is he government's key witness, as he is the only person who has alledged firsthand knowledge of Clemens taking performance-enhancing drugs. Spending two days, roughly twelve hours on the stand, McNamee has given vivid testimony of the injections he gave Clemens. McNamee also gave testimony of how his relationship with Clemens destroyed his marriage, and how his wife was concerned he was going to be the fall guy for Clemens. McNamee testified his soon-to-be ex-wife said the following:

"You're going to be the fall guy at his(Clemens) expense! You're going to go down! You're going to go down! You're going to go down!''

McNamee testified that as a result of his fight with his wife, he kept evidence of the injections he gave Clemens. McNamee claims he kept the needle, swab and cotton ball from a steroids injection he said took place in Clemens' New York City apartment in 2001. Alledgedly, he said he put the items in a beer can that he salvaged from the recycling bin in Clemens' kitchen, bringing the can home with him.

But the kicker here is this: McNamee claimed he didn't testify about these items in 2008 to the Feds because he hoped to minimize damage to Clemens, but did so after Clemens lawyers played a taped phone call that contained medical details about McNamee's oldest son. It was only at that time that McNamee retrieved the evidence and turned it in to authorities. Said McNamee about the situation:

It was 'beyond inhuman to do that to a kid. 'He had nothing to do with steroids in baseball, my son.It destroyed me. It killed me. ... I put myself in a situation where I had to do this.I had to tell the truth.''

Clemens lawyers have claimed that the evidence is tainted, and called the evidence garbage. The defense has been voracious in attacking McNamee's integrity and motives, as well as his trustworthyness, especially since he's acknowledged he's lied in the past. In fact, Clemens lawyer Rusty Hardin blunty asked McNamee the following:

Mr. McNamee, do you sometimes just make stuff up?'

There is so much more to this trial then I've described, so if you're interested, there are plenty of articles out there. Personally, I'm of the belief that Roger Clemens absolutely lied to Congress, and that McNamee did inject him with anabolic steroids. But the jury is still out on McNamee's reliability. Despite being warned to not do so, McNamee has referenced several times injecting Andy Pettite as well, which has raised concerns of a second mistrial, as one has already happened. Couple that with two jurors being dismissed from duty due to falling asleep, and this is a circus if I've ever seen one.

Brian McNamee: Credible legal witness?

Disregaring his legal credibility, do you believe Brian McNamee?

If you were to play prognosticator, will Roger Clemens be convicted? Why?

Off to you for thoughts.

 

[Mustang Sally]

As in the first O.J. Simpson trial, Clemens defense attorneys will look to fling as much mud on the wall as possible in order to impeach McNamee's testimony. Clemens has those high-priced attorneys that only celebrities can afford and they'll seek to have the court believe he's the worst sort of liar. Juries, who often hold witnesses to higher standards than they would have for themselves, might think McNamee is a liar because he couldn't remember exact words he said 15 years ago even though those jury members would understand they themselves wouldn't remember events from that long ago.

The thing that keeps coming back to me is: Why should McNamee lie about Clemens involvement with steroids? What for? If Clemens never went near the stuff, why would McNamee say he did?

If McNamee is going through all this garbage in order to become famous and write a book after it's over, he can do it without implicating an innocent man, no? Just getting involved in this mess in the first place, McNamee had to know the ordeal he'd be put through. Why do it if Clemens is totally innocent?

Yes, I believe Brian McNamee. Even if Clemens defense attorneys succeed in smearing McNamee's reputation from stem to stern and make him look like the world's biggest liar through these attorney tactics that have proven so successful in getting guilty people acquitted (O.J., again), I believe he injected Clemens with steroids and that Clemens lied through his teeth to Congress.

 

[Davi323]

I am going to keep this short and sweet:

I believe that Roger Clemens took steroids.
I believe that the prosecution's case is so piss poor that Clemens might still end up winning, despite everything.

If I can reference the OJ case like Sally did, it's not what you know. Just about everyone "knows" that OJ did it. It's not about that. It's about what you can prove.

I don't have a problem with Clemens attorneys going after McNamee at all. It's fair game. McNamee's story has changed numerous times, so questioning his credibility should be an obvious tactic. Any attorney worth a damn would do the same. That's how it works.

Because of that lack of consistency with his testimony, I am also fairly sure that Clemens will get off because of that. Outside of McNamee's testimony, the US Government has a an extremely slim supply of evidence against Clemens. Their entire case depends on McNamee's testimony. Given that he has changed that testimony numerous times, how could his testimony be treated as anything but suspect? If you succeed at bringing doubt on McNamee's testimony, the US Government has only circumstantial evidence at best. No McNamee, no case.

Basically, while I think we all know that Clemens did it, it can't be proven, so they will have to find him innocent.