personally, I doubt it, because if he denied usage on the stand, and then was found to have used, he would be subject to perjury charges and he would go to jail.
Additionally, I am not sure they could find a courtroom where his enlarged head could fit through the door (bada bing!)
In the end I think he'll make some noise and then back off.
what are your thoughts on this?
2007-12-17 01:41:03 · 9 answers · asked by rob 6 in Sports ➔ Baseball
He's not going to sue knowing that Pettitte just owned up to it, which really makes Clemens' denial look like a little kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar saying "I didn't do it". How is anyone supposed to believe Clemens now that his good friend and protege who shared the same trainer admitted it.
2007-12-17 01:54:35 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
And look how his physique thoroughly fell aside this season...because it replaced into coinciding with the examine. Is there no longer a parallel to the way Clemens might "unretire" in the process the season and cycles he might desire to take without the risk of any finding out/scruntiny. there is already one revealed tale that the Yankees are going to take a super hit as quickly as the document is launched this afternoon. however the tale should not be the Bronx; it would concentration on a drug way of life in a game from the clubhouse to the commissioner's place of work that replaced into as corrupt as any communist state-backed software (East Germany, u.s., etc.). A participant the two had to get with this technique - threat his well-being - or relatively fall at the back of the %. & possibly no longer have a expert interest....and people who might have stopped this the two refused or pretended this corruption did no longer exist.
2016-11-03 13:46:54 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All you hypocrites can say you think he is guilty of use. I am glad none of you may have smoked weed. Have any of you drank alcohol or smoked cigarettes before age 21? If SOMEONE said you use HGH, should we believe that person? If there is no proof how is a person guilty before the COURT of public? I forgot the public feels a person until proven innocent. I do not agree with a person using steroids or HGH 24/7, but if someone does it to heal, SO WHAT. If a person is injured in a game like football he goes in gets a shot and no one says anything. Yet that player can injure himself even worse. Yet, a player cannot use something to help heal faster. You people are nothing but hypocrites. Go look at yourself and think of how perfect you are. By the way, I am no fan of baseball, but I don't think people should be judged by others who are not PERFECT.
2007-12-17 03:30:52 · answer #3 · answered by CommonSense 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
And achieve what?
He could, but why? The PR mudbomb has already gone off; no court decision would change that, no amount of recompense could erase it. And it would require Mitchell's work to be proven materially wrong. The report is based upon uncorroborated testimony, not hard evidence -- flimsy -- but that doesn't mean it's wrong.
Clemens' road to cleaning up his image doesn't lead through a courtroom.
2007-12-17 01:57:33 · answer #4 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nope... What happens when he gets linked to roids with some concrete proof... whoops... And he's going to have a tough time convincing a jury that he's never roided.
2007-12-17 01:59:55 · answer #5 · answered by Reduviidae 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
no he will not sue george mitchell. in fact none of those players will because they all know that they took steroids. roger took steroids, so why would he sue?
2007-12-17 01:48:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
As far as I'm concerned, if he didn't admit it then its just all hear -say. Slander would be a great charge to put against Mitchell..
2007-12-17 03:07:48 · answer #7 · answered by dave51_1998 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No he will not sue, I agree he will deny it untill more proof is out
2007-12-17 01:53:43 · answer #8 · answered by BRAVESFAN 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I mean he looks in bad shape after players started admitting things . . . especially Petitte . . .
2007-12-17 03:07:13 · answer #9 · answered by bourgoise_10o 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋