« Dukies, Heels renew blood feud | Main | Will Martinez episode cause uproar? »

Clemens tale now resembles CSI episode

The Roger Clemens did-he-or-didn't-he saga just turned from sordid to sordid and bizarre when it was made public that the pitcher's former personal trainer-turned-accuser turned over physical evidence to federal prosecutors that Brian McNamee's side says corroborates his contentions.

Those contentions are, of course, that McNamee injected Clemens with steroids and human growth hormones 16 times in 1998, 2000 and 2001.  The physical evidence that McNamee is said to have handed over to investigators are syringes and pads with traces of Clemens' blood. Reportedly, McNamee produced the material about a month ago, in early January.

It's all vaguely reminiscent of Monica Lewinsky preserving Bill Clinton's DNA evidence on the famous blue dress that helped prove the two had inappropriate moments together.

It all seems to be the stuff of a CSI episode but there are some major differences between the alleged Clemens syringes and the Lewinsky-Clinton dress.  For one, the particular type of DNA evidence on the blue dress was damning in itself. In the case of Clemens and McNamee, it's acknowledged by Clemens that the trainer injected him with something -- B-12 and lidocaine. One could assume there's supposed to also be evidence of PEDs on this newly revealed material. So the question -- if this evidence is to be held under expert scrutiny where there has to be a high degree of scientific certainty established -- is whether the physical evidence has been tampered with or as Clemens' side has said, "manufactured."

There is also the considerably  problematic issue of what is called the chain of custody.  That's why police and investigators carefully document what happens to a piece of evidence from its discovery to its moment in court. There have been cases blown up over even a small interruption in documented chain of custody.  Here, we have evidence that has been in the hands of the accuser for many years.

And still further problematic is that if the timing of McNamee surrendering the evidence is true -- early January -- there is the outstanding question of why that evidence was withheld until after he apparently talked with federal investigators and the Mitchell Report officials, which was released in December.  You would think that if the trainer had told the senator about syringes, we would have all read about it in the report.

Meanwhile, today, McNamee talks with congressional staff members and Clemens makes one-on-one visits with some members of Congress, including Baltimore's own Rep. Elijah Cummings.  The big show is still scheduled for next Wednesday.

Where's Gil Grissom when you need him.

Photo credit: Associated Press

Comments

Its a 3 ring circus. The evidence is over 10 years old, if legit. What was the real reason to keep it in the first place, if it is real? They were supposed to be friends. Was the original intent to bring Roger down or blackmail him at a later date? I like your chain of custody comment. OJ's investigator got hammered for keeping evidence on him for several hours, which was outside the norm.
----------------------------------------------
Capt.,
Thanks fir bringing up the Simpson case. That was one I was thinking about ... and you mentioned, that was a short amount of time, not years.
-- Bill O.

It’s pretty clear that these items would never hold up as evidence in a courtroom because of chain of custody issues, but I think MacNamee and his lawyers were mostly just trying to stick it (pardon the pun) to Clemens in the court of public opinion. They waited until after he testified under oath on Capitol Hill to reveal the existence of this stuff, so they now have Clemens officially on the record as claiming his innocence (and, they believe, committing perjury).

Also, my understanding is that modern forensics specialists possibly could gather a lot of good evidence from these items, despite their age -- and determine whether any blood on the syringes came from an injection or was dipped or wiped on them, etc. Again, all this might not stand up in a trial, but this new evidence, plus MacNamee’s testimony and whatever Andy Pettitte testifies certainly could make the mountain of suspicion that Clemens has to overcome that much higher. ------------------------------------------ Joe, Yep, this is about a public relations battle and pressuring Clemens to back-peddle next week in front of Congress with the threat that there just might be a smoking gun. -- Bill O.


Deny, deny, deny. Sound familiar? Ha ha. Clemons lawyer Lanny Breuer was advising Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Now something Lanny never counted has happened. Too funny.

Robert Johnson wrote:

"Deny, deny, deny. Sound familiar? Ha ha. Clemons lawyer Lanny Breuer was advising Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Now something Lanny never counted has happened. Too funny."

Wrong Lanny! Clinton's was Lanny Davis.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Please enter the letter "o" in the field below:

About this blog


O, by the Way: Bill Ordine has been a reporter and editor for more than 25 years and during that time has covered Super Bowls, major murder trials, township zoning board meetings and bat mitzvahs. In his five years at The Sun, he has been an assistant city editor, pro football writer, poker columnist, enterprise sports reporter and now blogger -- which may indicate his editors have yet to find a job he can get right. E-mail Bill.

Also See

Powered by Movable Type 3.36
Hosted by LivingDot