22/05/2012 9:20 pm Welcome to isteroids.com - BLOG

Sunday 25, Jul 2010

  Lawyer of Roger Clemens keen to hear Brian McNamee

Posted By

Lawyer of Roger Clemens keen to hear Brian McNameeRusty Hardin, the lawyer hired by Roger Clemens for defending himself against claims that he made use of steroids, recently said that he is more than keen to hear what Brian McNamee has to say when he will be appearing before the Washington, D.C., grand jury investigating Roger Clemens for perjury.

It is worth noting here that Hardin called McNamee “a colossal liar” after the Mitchell report was released two-and-a-half years ago.

From NYdailynews.com:

The Washington grand jury that is investigating whether Clemens lied in 2008 when he told a congressional panel that he had never used steroids has been especially active in recent weeks, a sign that the 27-month probe might be at a crossroads.

The questioning of the witnesses who’ve appeared in recent weeks seems to have centered on the bloody gauze, vials and needles that McNamee claimed contained steroids and Clemens’ DNA. McNamee kept that evidence in a FedEx box in a closet for years, and turned it over to investigators shortly after the probe began.

McNamee is believed to have told other people about the existence of the waste long before he met with former Sen. George Mitchell, the author of Major League Baseball’s Mitchell Report on steroids, released in December of 2007. Congress asked the Department of Justice to investigate whether Clemens perjured himself after he told lawmakers conducting a hearing on Mitchell’s report two months later that he never used performance-enhancing drugs.

The Department of Justice was asked by Congress for identifying if Clemens perjured himself after making a communication to the lawmakers that he never used performance enhancing drugs.

Tuesday 15, Jun 2010

  Claims of Clemens revisited

Posted By

Claims of Clemens revisitedRusty Hardin, the lawyer hired by Roger Clemens to defend himself from claims that he used steroids, recently said that he is eager to hear what Brian McNamee has to say when he appear before the Washington, D.C., grand jury investigating Roger Clemens for perjury.

It is strange to notice the completely changed behavior of Clemens‘ attorney after he called McNamee “a colossal liar” after the Mitchell report was released two-and-a-half years ago.

From NYdailynews.com:

The Washington grand jury that is investigating whether Clemens lied in 2008 when he told a congressional panel that he had never used steroids has been especially active in recent weeks, a sign that the 27-month probe might be at a crossroads.

The questioning of the witnesses who’ve appeared in recent weeks seems to have centered on the bloody gauze, vials and needles that McNamee claimed contained steroids and Clemens’ DNA. McNamee kept that evidence in a FedEx box in a closet for years, and turned it over to investigators shortly after the probe began.

McNamee is believed to have told other people about the existence of the waste long before he met with former Sen. George Mitchell, the author of Major League Baseball’s Mitchell Report on steroids, released in December of 2007. Congress asked the Department of Justice to investigate whether Clemens perjured himself after he told lawmakers conducting a hearing on Mitchell’s report two months later that he never used performance-enhancing drugs.

Congress asked the Department of Justice to ascertain if Clemens perjured himself after communicating to the lawmakers that he never used performance enhancing drugs.

Wednesday 09, Jun 2010

  Sosa perjury charges not to be pursued by Congress

Posted By

Sosa perjury charges not to be pursued by CongressAccording to The Associated Press, former Major League slugger Sammy Sosa will not be facing an investigation for perjury.

It was reported by The Associated Press that the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform said that the panel will not be having the Justice Department look into whether Sosa lied during a March 2005 hearing before the Congress.

From mlb.mlb.com:

After Sosa’s name was revealed last June to reportedly be on a list of baseball players who allegedly failed drug tests in 2003, the chairman of the committee said he would look into possibly investigating Sosa for perjury, The AP wrote.

“After a review of the matter, we will not be taking any action,” committee spokeswoman Jenny Thalheimer Rosenberg told The AP.

According to the report, the committee might have been swayed toward not proceeding because of a five-year statute of limitations in such perjury cases with a deadline to press charges that expired in March.

That means Sosa, who hit 609 home runs over 18 big league seasons, will not face the same type of investigation currently surrounding former pitcher Roger Clemens, who told Congress in 2008 that he had not used steroids or human growth hormone and later had his testimony contradicted by Brian McNamee, his former personal trainer.

Committee spokeswoman Jenny Thalheimer Rosenberg told The AP that there will be no action against Sosa.

Tuesday 17, Nov 2009

  Clemens’ camp said they were not serious

Posted By

Clemens’ camp said they were not seriousAccording to Roger Clemens’ lawyers, the player and his camp were not at all serious when they questioned McNamee’s mental state. That is why Clemens’ camp filed a motion in Brooklyn federal court to dismiss a defamation lawsuit by Brian McNamee.

According to a report last November 12, in the New York Daily News, Roger Clemens, his lawyer Rusty Hardin and others were not serious about their accusations against Brian McNamee. This is according to the motion written by Joe Roden filed in Brooklyn. Roden was lawyer and a member of Hardin’s firm.

Roden said it was just part of the public battle of words. They do not intend to suggest to readers that McNamee is actually mentally unfit.

He also added that they were just trying to refute false evidence. Their action could not be considered as defamation. Clemens’ camp was recalled to have denied that Clemens used steroids or HGH. According to them, Clemens’ former trainer was just manufacturing evidence.

McNamee said the seven-time Cy Young Award winner received steroid and HGH injections while he was still with the Blue Jays and the Yankees from 1998 to 2001.

He even showed evidence in court by providing bloody gauze pads and used syringes, which he turned over after a congressional hearing last year.

From The Associated Press:

NEW YORK — Lawyers for Roger Clemens filed a motion in Brooklyn federal court to dismiss a defamation lawsuit by the pitcher’s former trainer, claiming statements that accused Brian McNamee of trying to shake down Clemens were not serious.

Tuesday 08, Sep 2009

  Clemens’ defamation suit to continue in New York

Posted By

Clemens’ defamation suit to continue in New YorkUS District Judge Keith P. Ellison dismissed the rest of Clemens’ case last August 28, 2009. This means that the case has been dismissed in Texas and Clemens could not refile in the said state. This leaves the case to be continued in New York.

Last January 2008, Roger Clemens sued his former personal trainer Brian McNamee after the trainer made a statement in the Mitchell report that he injected Clemens with steroids and human growth hormone for not less than 16 times in 1998, 2000 and 2001.

Not only did McNamee made the statement once but he also repeated it to Sports Illustrated’s website.  According to Clemens, the statements were untrue and defamatory.

McNamee responded by filing a case against Clemens for defamation on July 31, 2009. The case was filed in a federal court in Brooklyn, New York.

According to McNamee, Clemens issued an intense public relations offensive by refusing McNamee’s allegations in a nationally televised news conference in “60 minutes”.

In their legal battle in Brooklyn, Clemens is on defense side. Richard Emery, McNamee’s lawyer thinks that they have an advantage now that the case was moved to New York.

From Google Hosted News:

NEW YORK — The remainder of Roger Clemens defamation suit against Brian McNamee in Texas has been dismissed, leaving the pair to fight their legal battle in New York.

Friday 24, Apr 2009

  ROGER CLEMENS SHOULD SPEAK WITH PROSECUTORS ON DEFAMATION SUIT, SAYS BRIAN MCNAMEE’S LAWYERS

Posted By

ROGER CLEMENS SHOULD SPEAK WITH PROSECUTORS ON DEFAMATION SUIT, SAYS BRIAN MCNAMEE'S LAWYERSIt seems that the hot controversy encircling Roger Clemens and Brian McNamee has reached to a new turning point when McNamee’s lawyers said in a document filed in a Texas federal court that Clemens should talk to prosecutors in regard of defamation suit. They said that the prosecutors had forced McNamee to talk to former Sen. George Mitchell and not with his longtime trainer.

The document was a counter response to a motion filed by Clemens‘ attorney Rusty Hardin last month. In the motion, they asked U.S. District Judge Keith Ellison to review his decision of dismissing most of Clemens‘ defamation suit. The winner of seven times, Clemens filed the suit soon after the release of the Mitchell Report in December 2007.

It is to remind that in the Mitchell Report McNamee had admitted that he injected Clemens with steroids and human growth hormone numerous times from 1998-2001.

One of McNamee’s attorneys, Richard Emery said, “The thrust of our response is that Clemens is trying to blame Brian for what he is angry at the government prosecutors for doing – that is, compelling Brian to talk to them and tell the truth.”

He also said that the prosecutors compelled McNamee to talk and it was not his fault that they (prosecutors) made the report publicly. Clemens and his lawyers are pointing their fingers at the wrong person.

Hardin had argued in court filings that McNamee should not be protected with absolute immunity. He also pointed out that Assistant U.S. Attorney Matt Parrella, who had led much of the BALCO testing, gave argument that the intention behind the government’s steroid probe was to nail distributors and not athletes or users during the hearing of Tammy Thomas, the cyclist convicted of perjury last year, case. “McNamee’s statements to Mitchell about Clemens‘ alleged steroid use play no role in exposing and prosecuting drug distribution rings,” Hardin argued.

However, McNamee’s lawyers countered with the point that the prosecutors did not tell cooperating witnesses, the purpose or scope of their investigations.

From New York Daily News:

Roger Clemens should pick a fight with the prosecutors who forced Brian McNamee to talk to former Sen. George Mitchell, and not with his longtime trainer, McNamee’s lawyers said in a document filed in a Texas federal court late Wednesday.

The document was a response to a motion filed by Clemens’ attorney Rusty Hardin last month that asked U.S. District Judge Keith Ellison to reconsider his decision to dismiss most of Clemens’ defamation suit. The seven-time Cy Young winner filed the suit shortly after the Mitchell Report was released in December 2007 — in which McNamee told Mitchell and his investigators that he injected Clemens with steroids and human growth hormone numerous times between 1998-2001 — and it questioned granting McNamee immunity for the statements he made to Mitchell for his report on drug use in baseball.

“No private citizen, approached by the government, could know such things. It is for this reason that the law does not require a witness to be omniscient to be covered by absolute immunity,” says the filing.

According to Emery, Clemens could file a suit known as a “Bivens Action” against the government for abuse of authority. He further added, “If they did file that suit, at least they would have someone to point the finger at that has power. Brian has no power.”

Tuesday 21, Apr 2009

  CLEMENS ADVISED TO DIRECT ACCUSATIONS TO THE PROSECUTORS

Posted By

CLEMENS ADVISED TO DIRECT ACCUSATIONS TO THE PROSECUTORSDefence attorneys for Brian McNamee tell Roger Clemens to direct his accusations at the prosecutors and not at his trainer. He had been coerced and bribed with immunity to reveal to the investigators of Sen. George Mitchell that he had injected Clemens with steroids. McNamee’s lawyers filed this document at the Texas federal court. This was a countermotion to the appeal of Rusty Hardin, Clemens’ attorney, that US District Judge Keith Ellison would rethink the dismissal of the slander lawsuit against McNamee.

From The Daily News:

“The thrust of our response is that Clemens is trying to blame Brian for what he is angry at the government prosecutors for doing – that is, compelling Brian to talk to them and tell the truth,” said Richard Emery, one of McNamee’s attorneys. “That’s no basis for taking away Brian’s immunity. The prosecutors compelled him to talk and it was not Brian’s fault that they then made it public through the Mitchell Report. They (Clemens and his lawyers) are pointing their fingers at the wrong person.”

Hardin has argued in court filings that McNamee should not be protected with absolute immunity. Hardin pointed out that Assistant U.S. Attorney Matt Parrella, who had led much of the BALCO prosecution, argued in the case of Tammy Thomas, the cyclist convicted of perjury last year, that the purpose of the government’s steroid probe was to nail distributors, not athletes or users. McNamee’s statements to Mitchell about Clemens’ alleged steroid use play no role in exposing and prosecuting drug distribution rings, Hardin argued.

McNamee’s lawyers argued that he was not privy to the purpose of the prosecutors’ investigations. He did not know that his testimony for the George Mitchell report would be released to the public. The government had used its authority to force McNamee to divulge information about Clemens’ steroid use. In this light, Clemens’ should not lash at his trainer but rather at the prosecutors and the government.

Monday 13, Apr 2009

  Brian McNamee filed defamation summon against Roger Clemens

Posted By

Brian McNamee filed defamation summon against Roger ClemensIt seems that long-running war between Brian McNamee and Roger Clemens does not appear to be end. Recently, Brian McNamee has served a summons notifying Roger Clemens that he reserves the right to take legal action against the former Yankee pitcher for defamation. Representatives of McNamee’s lawyers served the summons last week at the Rocket’s home in the Memorial section of Houston.

McNamee’s defamation complaint is based partly on the comments of Clemens, in which he challenged the truthfulness of the trainer. Clemens’ comment also included an interview in front of the congressional committee investigating a steroid report by former Sen. In the report “George Mitchell,” McNamee declared that he injected Clemens with steroids and human growth hormone. The same night, Clemens filed his own defamation suit against McNamee and appeared on “60 Minutes.”

From The Daily News:

Brian McNamee has served Roger Clemens with a summons notifying him he is reserving the right to sue the former Yankee pitcher for defamation, continuing the bitter and long-running war between the two men.

Representatives of McNamee’s lawyers served the summons last week at the Rocket’s home in the Memorial section of Houston.

If a defamation complaint is filed by McNamee, it would be based partly on comments Clemens made about the trainer challenging his truthfulness, including in an interview on “60 Minutes” in 2008, and to the congressional committee investigating a steroid report by former Sen. George Mitchell in which McNamee claimed he injected Clemens with steroids and human growth hormone. Clemens filed his own defamation suit against McNamee the same night the pitcher appeared on “60 Minutes.”

“It is a suit for damages to Brian, based on allegations Clemens made to Congress and in the press,” said Earl Ward, one of McNamee’s lawyers.

One of McNamee’s lawyers, Earl Ward said, “It is a suit for damages to Brian, based on allegations Clemens made to Congress and in the press.” The “endorsed summons” officially notified Clemens about a complaint that attorneys of McNamee quietly filed in a Queens courthouse in December. Summon preserved the trainer’s right to sue the pitcher within a statute of limitations.

Whatever the reason behind the whole issue, one thing is confirmed that this particular move of McNamee would add more problems to Clemens’s already existing legal troubles. For more than a year, Clemens has been under investigation by the Justice Department for false swearing of allegedly lying to Congress.

Last month a federal judge ruled out that McNamee’s statements about Clemens’ steroid use to Mitchell were protected because they came in the course of a government investigation.

Saturday 21, Mar 2009

  CLEMENS APPEALS NOT TO DISMISS PERJURY RAPS VS. MCNAMEE

Posted By

CLEMENS APPEALS NOT TO DISMISS PERJURY RAPS VS. MCNAMEE  The war in court gets heated as baseball player Roger Clemens asks the court to rethink its decision to dismiss the perjury raps he filed against his former trainer Brian McNamee. This is the pitcher’s appeal to Judge Keith Ellison who ruled that McNamee was immune from being charged because he chose to become a state witness against Clemens and his other teammates. Clemens said this was unfair because his testimony was under the duress that he will not be prosecuted.

The 46-year-old pitcher is being charged with perjury after allegedly lying in a Congressional hearing that he did not use performance enhancing drugs. It was his word against McNamee’s who said he was the one who injected Clemens with the steroids in 1998-2001. He even had evidence to prove that he was telling the truth.

However, Clemens’ camp maintain his innocence saying his former trainer was malicious and was out to ruin his reputation.

From Bloomberg:

Ellison’s ruling “unwittingly gives prosecutors the power to grant absolute immunity to individuals who maliciously and falsely make public statements that accuse another of a crime,” Clemens’s lawyer Rusty Hardin said in the filing. “It effectively permits the government to try individuals in the court of public opinion and thereby destroy their reputation and livelihood regardless of whether the government ever intends to charge the person with a crime.”

A lawyer for McNamee, Richard Emery, said the request to reconsider was “an insult to the court.”

“It’s sort of like saying, ‘Please, Judge,’” Emery said in a telephone interview.

Clemens won seven Cy Young awards as his league’s best pitcher during his 24-year career, more than anyone in Major League Baseball history. He last pitched for the New York Yankees in 2007.

If his name and reputation was damaged because of McNamee’s testimony he would like the jurors to award damages to Clemens.

Sunday 22, Feb 2009

  DID PETTITTE TEAM UP WITH THE PROSECUTION?

Posted By

did-pettitte-team-up-with-the-prosecutionThe latest news on the Clemens case makes you wonder what Roger Clemens thought when he first heard about it. Remember Andy Pettitte? He used to be one of Clemens teammates and also one of his close friends. Their closeness was overpowered by the “closeness” Pettitte had with the scandal. Pettitte, unlike Clemens, admitted to the charges that he had been using performance enhancing drugs. Pettitte spoke in front of the Congress, in front of the news, and in front of the public, and his admission boosted the credibility of Clemens’ former trainer, Brian McNamee. McNamee was the one who charged Clemens with using steroids and human growth hormone. Pettitte saying that he used human growth hormone basically went every denial Clemens had made and made the public question the latter’s honestly.

From The New York Times:

Pettitte did not testify at the Congressional hearing last February in which Clemens and McNamee contradicted each other. But Pettitte provided a written statement under oath to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in which he said that Clemens admitted to him in 1999 or 2000 that he had used H.G.H.

Pettitte said that he told his wife about that conversation. His wife, Laura Pettitte, also provided a written statement under oath to the committee in which she confirmed the conversation with her husband.

At present, it is still unknown where the information on the meeting came from or what the meeting was about. The United States attorney’s office still chooses not to disclose any information on the issue.

« Prev - Next »