Comments on: The evidence against Roger Clemens continues to be underwhelming

By: David Nieporent

David Nieporent — Thu, 10 May 2012 23:31:55 +0000

I’ll have you know that Mr. Munson is no longer suspended by the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission for ethics violations, so he’s entirely qualified to be a legal commentator.

By: ghouchens

ghouchens — Thu, 10 May 2012 01:49:15 +0000

government lawyers don’t like to lose or have their cases tossed out by judges. It is an ego thing.

By: skids003

skids003 — Wed, 09 May 2012 20:48:25 +0000

Is that the one where he threw the broken bat at Piazza? I’ve never forgiven Piazza for not charging the mound and kicking his arrogant butt.

By: JB (the original)

JB (the original) — Wed, 09 May 2012 19:27:18 +0000

A clip from today’s StarTribune.com article on the trial:

Also Wednesday, Judge Walton dismissed a juror because he had been sleeping and showing up late for trial. During jury selection, the juror, an unemployed man in his 20s, said he’d rather be sleeping than be in court but promised to be “wide awake” if selected. The jury has four alternates.

Must be some excitng stuff….

By: walleyejon

walleyejon — Wed, 09 May 2012 19:06:56 +0000

I heard Pete Rose just put 20 grand on Not Guilty

By: chill1184

chill1184 — Wed, 09 May 2012 18:17:27 +0000

The government shouldn’t have been involved from the start. Yes we know that Clemens is a complete and total douchebag for juicing and their is no excusing for that but jail time is beyond retarded (along with the rest of the drug war for that matter). The punishment for players who juice should be simple; 1. Cooperstown is closed to you (asterisks should be added to the record books), 2. A juicer should not be allowed to be a coach in any capacity in MLB. Yes these would never come to fruit because as we say with the Ryan Braun issue, MLB can’t live up to it’s own standard. Also for god sakes put Pete Ross in the Hall as a player.

By: heynerdlinger

heynerdlinger — Wed, 09 May 2012 18:11:33 +0000

There was talk about this in David Simon’s book, “Homicide: A Year on the Killing Street” which written in 1988.

I wonder to what extent this effect cuts the other way as well. The CSI shows make it seem like a tiny shred of hair or carpet fiber can prove a murder case when there could be some doubtful (but scientific!) science to support it.

Not that DNA is inherently suspect, but what jury is going to doubt even the slightest amount of DNA these days?

By: buffalomafia

buffalomafia — Wed, 09 May 2012 17:30:31 +0000

Go to jail! Do not pass go or collect HGH!

By: ltzep75

ltzep75 — Wed, 09 May 2012 17:26:51 +0000

Craig, its not fair that you make the comment of the year on your own blog. At any rate, I think you can take the rest of the day off after that gem.

By: ltzep75

ltzep75 — Wed, 09 May 2012 17:25:21 +0000

I was at least taught the CSI effect during many an evidence/crim pro/crim law lecture. Number of my associates were as well.

By: ltzep75

ltzep75 — Wed, 09 May 2012 17:23:44 +0000

Plenty of lawyers are being employed due to this trial. Does that count?

By: sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo

sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo — Wed, 09 May 2012 17:08:29 +0000

My guess is that 2 Clemens trials will have been held without a conviction before Khalid Sheik Mohammed gets to trial. I know one has little to do with the other, but if there are prosecutors who feel they have the time to pursue Clemens, perhaps someone in authority should help them with their resource management.

By: 18thstreet

18thstreet — Wed, 09 May 2012 16:49:00 +0000

I think he should be convicted for the 1990 ALCS. Now, what’s this about steroids?

By: umrguy42

umrguy42 — Wed, 09 May 2012 16:44:39 +0000

My uncle, the ex-cop, ex-special investigator, and current professor of Criminal Justice (and part-time blogger for Investigation Discovery), believes in it as well. (For whatever that’s worth :p)

By: Jonny 5

Jonny 5 — Wed, 09 May 2012 16:38:52 +0000

Evidence? Evidence? We don’t need no steenking evidence to blow millions of dollars chasing an athlete for putting a substance in his own body. It’s not as if our gov’t is in a deficit, or Social security is in jeopardy, or people are having a huge issue paying for their medicine in retirement. Or anything like tha…

By: skids003

skids003 — Wed, 09 May 2012 16:16:37 +0000

For real, something relevant like “Fast and Furious” or something.

By: Craig Calcaterra

Craig Calcaterra — Wed, 09 May 2012 16:12:36 +0000

Wake me up the first day Lester Munson is right about anything ever.

By: makeham98

makeham98 — Wed, 09 May 2012 16:09:55 +0000

and once Clemens’ lawyers again throw his wife under the bus over hgh, then what?

glad to see that not only are the feds wasting so much money on a celebrity prosecution, they are using even bigger dirtbags than clemens to make their case.

By: The Dangerous Mabry

The Dangerous Mabry — Wed, 09 May 2012 16:04:40 +0000

Astonishingly, Lester Munson once again disagrees with you, Craig, and thinks the Prosecution had a strong day, and are building the foundation of a case that’s looking very strong.

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/7906927/after-judge-berates-attorneys-prosecution-strong-day-roger-clemens-perjury-trial

By: sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo

sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo — Wed, 09 May 2012 16:02:33 +0000

I don’t remember the exact statistics, but I have read that those in authority choose to avoid court trials in the vast majority of cases brought before them. Who the hell decided that this was worth the effort? A tattered piece of paper that may or may not be legit (you have the take a drug dealer’s word for it) and some dirty needles kept for years in a dirty soda can by a man who wanted to implicate his client (again, we have to take a different drug dealer’s word for it).

Someone thought this was a keeper?

By: Craig Calcaterra

Craig Calcaterra — Wed, 09 May 2012 15:40:26 +0000

Not sure how you’d measure it, but my litigator friends certainly believe it. Have had it borne out in post-trial juror interviews in which jurors talked about how a given piece of evidence wasn’t convincing whereas, ten years ago, no one would ever question it.

Obviously anecdotal, of course.

By: churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged

churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged — Wed, 09 May 2012 15:35:02 +0000

especially in these post-CSI days when jurors expect a ton more from physical evidence than that which could reasonably be given

Obvious caveat that IANAL, but is this true or just an oft used cliche?

By: heyblueyoustink

heyblueyoustink — Wed, 09 May 2012 15:26:24 +0000

Still though, a total waste of government taxes.

By: WhenMattStairsIsKing

WhenMattStairsIsKing — Wed, 09 May 2012 15:17:14 +0000

Whether Clemens is found guilty or not, his legacy’s horribly tainted and the world knows what a stubborn douchebag he really is.

By: latchbeam

latchbeam — Wed, 09 May 2012 15:11:58 +0000

This is an absolute joke!! Can’t the government spend the time and resources on something to create a job instead of this?? A drug dealer, scumbags word is enough to try this case?? TWICE??