Three huge stories begin 2008: the US presidential election, the on-going war in Iraq, and Roger Clemens's crusade for steroid clemency. Well, one large story -- Clemens -- and 2 relatively large stories. And not really 'clemency' but 'acquittal'.
Someone tell us why lawyers seem to crowd out athletes on the sports pages these days? Today's Clemens twist comes from Brian McNamee's camp. McNamee, the trainer who claims gluteal knowledge of Clemens's steroids, assembled a team of lawyers to counter Clemens's team of Texas all-star lawyers. We say forgot the home-run derby; let's choose sides and argue tort law the night before the All-Star game.
On to the circus sideshow. Brain McNamee's lawyer says if Roger Clemens even hints that his client is untruthful, the McNamee camp sues the Clemens group. If that scenario occurs, Clemens could find himself sworn in to testify in a Manhattan NY court. Story in the NY Times.
Roger Clemens will face a lawsuit if he says in a “60 Minutes” interview that his former personal trainer, Brian McNamee, was not truthful when he said he injected Clemens with performance-enhancing drugs, a lawyer hired by McNamee said Wednesday.
The “60 Minutes” interview was taped Friday at Clemens’s home in Katy, Tex., and is scheduled to be broadcast Sunday at about 7:30 p.m. Eastern, after the conclusion of an N.F.L. playoff game. The lawyer, Richard D. Emery, said in a telephone interview that Clemens should try to keep the segment off the air or face a lawsuit for damaging McNamee’s livelihood.
“He’s got a chance to protect himself,” said Emery, who is based in New York and specializes in libel and defamation actions. “We’re not going to sue him if he doesn’t do it. But if he does it, we’re going to sue him.”
Now at bat for Clemens's team, Rusty Hardin:
When told of Emery’s comments, Clemens’s lawyer, Rusty Hardin, said, “I believe a client who’s telling the truth should tell the world the truth.”
However McNamee looked for a pick-off move:
Emery said he was mystified why Hardin would allow Clemens to speak with “60 Minutes.”
“It’s really a huge risk on his part to subject Roger to a Manhattan jury on either our defamation case or on a perjury case when he testifies under oath in our defamation case,” Emery said.
Anyone get the idea, this back and forth will continue all year?
Comments