Skip to content

Roger Clemens files his double jeopardy motion

Jul 29, 2011, 3:10 PM EST

Roger Clemens

As we noted last week, Roger Clemens’ lawyers are going to try to argue that he can’t be re-tried because doing so would violate his constitutional right against the double jeopardy. He filed a motion to that effect today, arguing that the prosecutors — worried that they were losing —  intentionally introduced impermissible evidence for the sole purpose of getting a mistrial, and as such, should not be allowed to try him again.

Sort of like when your brother hit “reset” on the old Atari 2600 just when you were about to beat his high score.

This is kind of hard to take, though, because the trial was only in its second day.  And the first day was so mind-numbingly boring that if the prosecution really did completely bollocks up their case, no one else had really noticed it.

Nice try, and I suppose there’s a chance Clemens wins, but I kinda doubt it.

  1. aaronmoreno - Jul 29, 2011 at 3:16 PM

    You kidding me? This is a slam dunk for Roger! Wikipedia says so! So did my friend who once worked for a lawyer!

    • nocryinginbaseball07 - Jul 29, 2011 at 7:29 PM

      “Wikipedia says so…”

      That’s actually pretty funny.

  2. hittfamily - Jul 29, 2011 at 3:25 PM

    Obligatory “I’m an expert” comment.

  3. Chris Fiorentino - Jul 29, 2011 at 3:32 PM

    I hope he wins so all this nonsense is behind us. I find it more appalling that Florida won’t be charging Casey Anthony’s mom got perjury when her perjury may have affected something important…like a murder case…instead of something that was a stupid waste of time…like a meeting before Congress.

  4. sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Jul 29, 2011 at 4:12 PM

    Can’t his lawyers just argue that the whole thing is a big fat stupid waste of time and money? I would love to hear the counter-argument.

    • umrguy42 - Jul 29, 2011 at 4:21 PM

      The only possible response: “Your honor, in response to defense counsel, the prosecution states: ‘Nuh UHHH!’”

  5. nickynick04 - Jul 29, 2011 at 5:24 PM

    How about the prosecutor’s response, He lied & cheated….and is an arrogant scum…works for me

  6. tuftsb - Jul 29, 2011 at 5:43 PM

    The prosecution should have called Mike Piazza as their first witness.

  7. philsfan1 - Jul 29, 2011 at 7:40 PM

    Four letters- J-A-I-L

  8. ditto65 - Jul 29, 2011 at 7:53 PM

    “…the first day was so mind-numbingly boring that if the prosecution really did completely bollocks up their case, no one else had really noticed it.”

    Then they introduced evidence that the judge forbade them from using. Maybe they don’t have a case?

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Maddon has high hopes for Cubs
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. G. Stanton (5156)
  2. P. Sandoval (3714)
  3. R. Martin (3646)
  4. J. Lester (3445)
  5. Y. Tomas (2750)
  1. T. Hunter (2413)
  2. J. Heyward (2306)
  3. M. Scherzer (2115)
  4. B. Butler (1995)
  5. J. Hellickson (1905)