2007-12-15 15:12:16 · 17 answers · asked by cantonbound 3 in Sports ➔ Baseball
none of the players have to show that they didnt use,MLB will be the ones having to defend their statements,hearsay alone wont cut the ice in a court room
2007-12-15 15:29:03 · update #1
I meant most of the players will or should sue ,I read a good portion of the report and most of the evidence is hearsay even the checks that it shows are just checks made out to trainers, i see very little evidence that would stand up in court...
2007-12-15 15:57:39 · update #2
I dont know if any of them used HGH or what ever,thats not my point
2007-12-15 15:59:08 · update #3
While it is true that truth is a defense to defamation (libel or slander), any of the players named would be running a big risk if they were in fact dirty. If a player could show that there was nothing linking him to steroids or HGH, it would come down to the player vs. the testimony of Radomski or McNamee. If Roger Clemens brought a lawsuit in harris county (Houston) Texas against major league baseball, it might actually succeed if Clemens were willing to testify under oath in depositions and later in court that he never used steroids or HGH. As to Clemens, I don't recall seeing checks or shipment receipts, which would be very hard for him to explain away.
2007-12-15 22:23:09 · answer #1 · answered by mattapan26 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
First off, they can't sue MLB. Major League Baseball had nothing to do with a congressional investigation of illegal steroid use. Congress and Senator Mitchell decided to open this bag of worms all on their own. Secondly, the ballplayer's will have to prove that what the report said wasn't true. They have to prove that Senator Mitchell wrote those things to purposely hurt the reputations of those players. And to wrap it all up, The report is hearsay evidence, which means it may not even end up in court. Senator Mitchell was simply reporting what someone else told him. The players need to own up to what they have done, this is a shame for MLB, but i am glad that it is finally starting to come to an end. A lot of the answers are saying things like Clemens is guilty, the report had nothing to do with any kind of criminal charges being brought up against any players.
2007-12-15 18:00:18 · answer #2 · answered by Test 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
He will likely get as much in court as Bonds did from the cronicle reporters,
Oh, that was $0 wasn't it.
The onus IS on the plantiff (clemens in your case) to show that the statement is 1) untrue and 2) harmful.
He will have to drag Canseco into court and the source into court and get them all to say that it wasn't true, then convince the judge or jury that it's untrue.
Unless he has Denny Crane as his lawyer, I doubt he will bring suit.
If he doesn't bring suit, would that be enough FOR YOU to see he is guilty?
Also, seeing as your question would mean you think he's innocent, what about everyone else, are they all innocent too? Pettite, Juan Gonzalez, Vina, Gibbons? Are they all unfairly identified?
2007-12-15 15:39:54 · answer #3 · answered by brettj666 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I have no problem whatsoever with these games being shown. These players were some of the greatest baseball players ever, and to deny their existence or pretend they never played is a disservice. Clemens and Bonds both had Hall of Fame careers without the steroids, and nobody questions Rose's Hall of Fame credentials if not for the gambling. I don't think Clemens or Bonds used steroids until later in their careers, so any of the games shown on MLB were probably pre-steroids anyway. I actually enjoy seeing these games, although they do make me a little sad with the "...if only they hadn't done what they did..." thing.
2016-04-09 06:01:53 · answer #4 · answered by Donna 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Clemens will get absolutely nothing. Slander is something untrue. My question to u is when will clemens own up to taking steroids and HGH like his bud, pettitte did. My advice to you is wake up and smell the coffee. Put a fork in him, hes done.
2007-12-15 15:18:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Anyone can sue anyone for any amount of money. What matters is that first, they would have to win the lawsuit. Second the jury would have to determine the damages in order to settle on the amount of money that would have to be paid. A long drawn out process! I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you!
2007-12-15 15:17:44 · answer #6 · answered by The Mick 7 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
i doubt any of them will be doing that any time soon... Come on.. most of them, with their huge heads and muscles.. you only have to look at them to know. They would be better to come clean and take their lumps.. they got the money they wanted.. take it and retire somewhere, but do not expect the hall of fame or undying gratitude of the fans. If you cheat.. you cheat everyone.
2007-12-15 17:31:57 · answer #7 · answered by Debra H 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
none. It has to be proved to be false before he can sue. there must be enough evidence for him to say he didnt use them. If you know the law you know that before it can be put into print, you must give the accused an opportunity to explain thier side. he refused to talk to mitchell. so he has no standing to sue. he is guilty!!! and one more thing... It's not slander. if its put into print its called "Libel"
2007-12-15 18:21:47 · answer #8 · answered by David Z 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
in order to sue mlb he would take lumps. and then indeed be called as a witness and any lawyer would love to have him under oath. to speak the truth and nothing but the truth. money? from mlb ...easy nada....money from steinbrenner 30 million easily
2007-12-15 15:35:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
As many times as Clemens is mentioned in that report he is very guilty and I doubt he will ever get anything in a lawsuit!
2007-12-15 15:17:06 · answer #10 · answered by G.W. loves winter! 7 · 6⤊ 2⤋