Roger Clemens and Steroids (Alomar, players, professional, pitchers)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No offense, but exactly what has he been found guilty of? Not looking for the various "reports", but real judicial convictions?
None taken.
A legal conviction is not required to determine someone's guilt or lack of the same in the minds of individuals. Pete Rose was never convicted of betting on MLB in a court of law, but my conclusion, after reviewing the evidence offered and watching Rose's conduct after the accusation, was that he was absolutely guilty. A decade worth of heated denials and claims of persecution later, Rose finally confessed that he had been lying the entire time.
O.J. Simpson wasn't convicted of homicide, but I certainly believe that he was guilty. For that matter neither Hitler nor Stalin was ever charged with a crime in a court of law. Does the lack of a judicial conviction for them cause you to doubt that they were guilty of crimes?
So, there is the legal system, there is the court of public opinion, and there are private conclusions.
My private conclusions? Based on the available evidence which has been made public, and Clemens' behavior since being accused, I see no reason to think him taintless and pure.
Last edited by Grandstander; 08-24-2012 at 11:13 AM..
Hmm. Godwin strikes again...
In reality though, only what has happened matters. You or I may draw our own conclusions from whatever we see/hear/read, but unless we are afforded some special insight it is highly unlikely that either of us (or me, at least) has anything resembling the pertinent data, thus we may (and do) have opinions, but you know the old saw about opinions...
(PS - Hitler was charged & convicted, Stalin not long ago...)
Hmm. Godwin strikes again...
In reality though, only what has happened matters. You or I may draw our own conclusions from whatever we see/hear/read, but unless we are afforded some special insight it is highly unlikely that either of us (or me, at least) has anything resembling the pertinent data, thus we may (and do) have opinions, but you know the old saw about opinions...
You are very much mistaken with the above. What people believe to be true matters quite a lot, regardless of the veracity of the belief. Millions have died over the centuries as a product of their religious beliefs, were all of these beliefs true?
And what is your beef with people forming opinions? The entire jury system, which produces the legal decisions which you seem to find validating or invalidating, is nothing more than a jury opinion regarding the evidence. I bet that when you see a stat which lists Soandso as having made 25 errors at thirdbase in 2005, you think of that as an absolute...Soandso made 25 flubs. But...what is an error in baseball other than someone's opinion that a play should have been made? Would every observer make the same ruling on every call as the official scorer?
You are creating an artificial distinction when you elevate a legal conviction to some status beyond any other opinion, legal convictions are opinions. The only difference is that the legal opinion comes with legal consequences, it does not come with any greater legitimacy than another opinion. As I noted, O.J. Simpson escaped conviction, but my opinion is that he was guilty. Should I disregard the evidence of my own senses and logic and subordinate my opinion to the Simpson jury because they were legally constituted?
"The only difference is that the legal opinion comes with legal consequences, it does not come with any greater legitimacy than another opinion"
Well, since the discussion is about legal consequences, then perhaps one should honor said process. Otherwise, we're just batting opinions around. Your "belief" in my (hypothetical) guilt doesn't exactly fill me w/confidence that agreed upon standards were met.
In this case, Clemens has not been found guilty of any crime, and as a matter of factual record prosecutors then settled on procedural claims, with even those lost by unanimous verdict. If you have any real, hard, factual evidence to the contrary, I'm sure the prosecution would very much like to have access...
"The only difference is that the legal opinion comes with legal consequences, it does not come with any greater legitimacy than another opinion"
Well, since the discussion is about legal consequences, then perhaps one should honor said process. Otherwise, we're just batting opinions around. Your "belief" in my (hypothetical) guilt doesn't exactly fill me w/confidence that agreed upon standards were met.
In this case, Clemens has not been found guilty of any crime, and as a matter of factual record prosecutors then settled on procedural claims, with even those lost by unanimous verdict. If you have any real, hard, factual evidence to the contrary, I'm sure the prosecution would very much like to have access...
I am not in a court of law, I am not bound by any procedures outside of my own ability to reason and draw fair conclusions. There are no agreed upon standards at work. If I was serving on a jury, then I would have a legal obligation to employ the standards outlined by the judge. In such circumstances, it is easily possible that I might conclude that someone is guilty, but wind up voting not guilty because the evidence failed to meet the prevailing legal standards.
I have no such obstructions with which to cope when expressing my opinion in a public forum. Your assertion, apparently an important one because you made it in bold letters, "since the discussion is about legal consequences", is nothing more than your caprice. Neither the title of this thread, nor the opening post, nor subsequent discussions, suggest in any manner that we are limited to discussing legal consequences.
Clemens signed with the Sugar Land Skeeters of the Atlantic League
Apparently he will start on Saturday to see how he can handle the hitters. If he's successful, it sounds like he may attempt to continue pitching. Apparently the Astros watched him work out and a few scouts may even show up for his game on Saturday
Clemens pitched 3 1/3 innings. He struck out 2 and walked 0 while throwing 37 pitches. He gave up 1 hit and 0 runs.
I've heard that his fastball reached 88 MPH and that his other offerings were not especially impressive.
The Royals and Astros had scouts there to watch him.
If this was the beginning of a comeback, it's going to take some more work
Well, GS, neither of us are responsible for the balance of posts in this - or any other thread. I, however, simply asked @ legal issues, to which you've seemingly replied along the lines of "he's not guilty, but I know better" or some such.
Thanks for the terrific insight, and you've been a real resource in finding out more @ the legal issues surrounding the various cases...
Well, GS, neither of us are responsible for the balance of posts in this - or any other thread. I, however, simply asked @ legal issues, to which you've seemingly replied along the lines of "he's not guilty, but I know better" or some such.
Thanks for the terrific insight, and you've been a real resource in finding out more @ the legal issues surrounding the various cases...
That is not what I stated and I am left to wonder if the above represents a deliberate misunderstanding or simply poor comprehension skills.
Why you are unable to wrap your mind around the distinction between a a legal verdict and a private opinion eludes me. In fact your main point eludes me. Is it...we are not allowed to form opinions in the absense of legal process? Is it...regardless of private evaluation we must embrace only legal conclusions?
Do you not have any private opinions on this matter? Do you think that Clemens has never used steroids and never lied to us when offering denials? Or do you prohibit yourself from forming such opinions, sublimating your own judgment to others who happen to be involved in the legal proceedings?
Talk @ unable to wrap one's mind around something... that's funny. I asked @ legal issues, you keep bringing up opinions. Of course I have opinions - and I see that you do as well...
However, I also see you have (so far) has little response to my question, so while I thank you for your continued posts @ opinions, you're not really helping me to understand the legal issues.
Oh, and yes, you did state what you believed the thread to be about, and continue to do so...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
