Roger Clemens, sworn in under oath, testified he did not attend a party hosted by Jose Canseco...a party where reports says steroid use came under discussion. Clemens's ex-trainer, the infamous Brian McNamee, when sworn in gave testimony that he remembers Clemens, Clemens's wife and family, and Clemens's nanny attending the party. He said-she said, right?
Maybe not. The New York Daily News says McNamee's lawyers have procured photographic evidence of the Rocket at Canseco's pad.
As the congressional committee that spent nine weeks considering Roger Clemens' attack on the Mitchell Report now quietly mulls referring the entire matter to the Justice Department, federal investigators seasoned in the anti-doping game are ready to hit the ground running.
Their leads could include new photographic evidence that has emerged to potentially undermine Clemens' sworn testimony that he did not attend a 1998 party at the home of his then-teammate Jose Canseco - a party that figured both in the Mitchell Report and the Feb.13 public hearing in Washington.
The photo is owned by a young man who attended the party when he was 11 years old and took photos of his baseball heroes, including Clemens. Richard Emery, one of the lawyers for Clemens accuser Brian McNamee, was aware that such evidence had been circulating this week.
"We have reason to believe it's reliable evidence," Emery told the Daily News on Thursday. "We believe there's photographic evidence that shows Clemens was at a party he says he wasn't at."
Does this mean the Justice Dept will launch a Clemens perjury investigation? Who knows? How important is the issue? Does this evidence even become admissible in court? Is everyone tired of trials-by-media-release?
Maybe someone saved a swizzle-stick from a cocktail to analyze for DNA.