Clemens 'innocent' but not vindicated

Editorials

Discussion

COMMENTING ON STORIES:

Welcome to our story comments feature. We welcome your thoughts and your opinions, including the unpopular ones. We only ask that you keep your conversations clean, civil and on the topic of the story you are commenting on.

Coinciding with our websites redesign, we launched our new story comments feature through Disqus.

Disqus gives users the ability to log into our story comments feature so that they may be able to track their conversations, receive emails when their comments get a reply or to even have your comments update onto your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

For the time being, our story comments feature will continue to have the ability to post comments anonymously. We reserve the right to require registration in the future using your name and verified email address.

Not all comments are deemed printable. Some are disqualified at the newspaper’s discretion for a number of different reasons. Please follow our Online Rules of Conduct at all times.

RULES OF CONDUCT:

We reserve the right to remove comments that are unacceptable, to wit:

1. False and inacurate statements.
2. Personal attacks. Explicit name-calling.
3. Harassing, harmful, vulgar, obscene and defamatory language.
4. Threatening statements or statements that suggest violence.
5. Hate speech of any kind.
6. Intolerant comments on religion, race, age, gender, sexual preference or disabilities.
7. Accusations of criminal activity.
8. Content that is harmful to children and minors in any way.
9. References to any type of sexual activity and other private matters.
10. Random and inflammatory statements that are off topic.
11. Advertising of any kind.
12. Typing in all caps.

WE ENCOURAGE REASONABLE AND COURTEOUS COMMENTS THAT:

1. Create conversation on issues of interest and concern to fellow readers and local community members.
2. Express opinions and contrarian views.
3. Stimulate debate with respectful language.
4. Stay within the boundaries of these rules.

WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO SUSPEND OR TERMINATE ACCESS FOR:

1. Violating any of these Online Rules of Conduct.
2. Deliberately disrupting discussions with repetitive messages, meaningless messages or spam.
3. Misrepresentation of identity or impersonating another user.

WE WELCOME:

1. Flagging violations of these rules that you observe to our attention.

MONITORING:

We monitor comments regularly Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Approval of comments outside of this time (including weekends) will be sporadic.

comments powered by Disqus

June 20, 2012

Clemens 'innocent' but not vindicated

Anonymous Daily Star The Daily Star Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:39 PM EDT

Roger Clemens is innocent.

He's innocent like O.J. Simpson was innocent.

He's innocent like the cops that brutally beat up the late Rodney King were innocent.

He's innocent of taking steroids like fellow ex-major leaguer Barry Bonds was innocent.

A jury in Washington, D.C. on Monday acquitted Clemens of six charges related to lying to Congress about taking performance-enhancing drugs.

Juries also found Simpson innocent in 1995 of killing his estranged wife and her friend, those police officers in 1992 of using undue force on King, and didn't convict Bonds last year on most of the charges involving ingesting steroids and human growth hormones.

It makes us wonder that if he were living in this country today, whether Cain could have lawyered up and persuaded a jury that he hadn't bumped off his brother, Abel.

Getting 12 people to say you did it _ particularly in a high-profile case _ is becoming increasingly difficult, bordering upon impossible.

Perhaps it's the phrase "beyond a reasonable doubt" that so often gets in the way of justice. When does "reasonable" become "absurd"? All it took in the Bonds case was one juror who held out on all but one charge.

Around here, the livelihoods of merchants and others greatly depend upon the Hall of Fame inductions in Cooperstown luring tourists to attend the July ceremony.

Clemens, a former Yankees and Red Sox player, would be big business, and he has been acquitted in a court of law. Whether he is vindicated will rely greatly upon the votes this January by the Baseball Writers' Association of America.

Clemens will be on the ballot to enter the Hall of Fame. So will Bonds and another suspected steroid abuser with Hall-worthy statistics, Mike Piazza.

Included in the instructions sent to the baseball writers is this character clause:

"Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character and contribution to the team(s) on which the player played."

It takes 75 percent of the writers' votes to gain admission to the Hall without a ticket. Last year, steroid-tainted Mark McGwire received less than 20 percent, and Rafael Palmeiro 12.6 percent.

While it is true that among the "legends" in the Hall of Fame are a number of wife-beaters, drunks and racists, we hope that the writers don't glorify those they believe cheated, despite what a jury may have decided.

It is our opinion that it stretches credulity far beyond the breaking point to believe that Bonds and Clemens were clean.

When parents take their kids to the Hall of Fame, they should expect to see plaques honoring heroes ... rather than cheaters who had persuasive lawyers.