Now that Clemens wasnt mentioned in the Grimsley report, will everyone leave him alone???

Answer 1

Just because he was left out of one report doesn't make him innocent. Just as the people that weren't named in the Mitchell report aren't necessarily clean.

Unfortunately, in the court of public opinion ball players are going to have to prove their innocence as opposed to prosecution proving their guilt. It's sad, but true.

Answer 2

of course not. There are actually others mentioned in Grimsley's affidavit whom are not mentioned in the Mitchell Report and vice versa. Does this mean anyone not named in Grimsley's affidavit is steroid free? If so, I highly recommend that you never go into practicing law because your logic is extremely flawed. Grimsely did not mention Bonds, either, so should the feds drop their charges? Grimsley's affidavit is based on his own knowledge. I read that he reiterated a conversation he had with some of his former Baltimore teammates...etc. The Mitchell Report cites other witness testimony and THEY bring Clemens into it. Unless someone proves that witness committed perjury or Clemens can prove otherwise, the testimony will stand. And it is not even defamation of character unless the allegations are proven false. Clemens has to prove those allegations were published publicly and were known to be false at the time of publication. If people truly want to understand the issue, a cursory glance at the law might be wise.

Answer 3

as far as my recolection goes, jason grimsley wasnt ever a teammate of roger clemens, so how would he know?
i think a man saying that he personally stuck the needle into clemens is a far more reliable source
im still far more inclined to beleive he did take steroids considering his quick rise after a steady decline and the fact that he seemed to get better with age, which isnt natural
at this point, its on clemens to come out and absolutely refute the evidence, or for that trainer to admit he lied, if he did
having petite admit use hurt clemens chances a lot
and until there is proof he didnt take, i assume he did
so hes just as bad as bonds

Answer 4

No, I just heard on 1st and 10 Clemens basically has to PROVE his innocence. Even though Grimsley's "court sealed" document which was unsealed did not mention his name. They are still taking the word of someone who supposedly gave him the shots. The same man who was told to give names or go to jail. Remember, you are guilty until proven innocent in the court of public.

Answer 5

The Grimsley report is not the "Holy Grail" and does not contain the names of everyone that used drugs. The Mitchell report stands on it's own and that will be the report that MLB will address.

Answer 6

No. And people won't leave him alone either. Nor should they. He HAS to clear his name. One way, or the other. If he didn't take performance enhancing drugs, then he should confidently testify under oath. George Mitchell didn't just name Roger Clemens in his report because he felt like it. We all should have seen this when he threw the half-broken bat at Mike Piazza from the mound in the2000 World Series. "Roid Rage."

Answer 7

Everyone should leave them all alone.

None of the allegations will ever be proved.

Answer 8

I didn't see Bonds' name either. I assume you're asking everyone to leave him alone too.

Answer 9

Maybe. The did play together for i believe 2 seasons, or however long Grimsley was with the yanks. (I think 99,2000)

Maybe they will leave him alone idk

Answer 10

At least he wasn't mentioned, but he still has a cloud.