Here's what I suspect happened: Clemens met McCready when she was 15. She fell for him immediately, him being a famous loud athlete type, and her being, oh, let's say extremely insecure. Chemistry happens, but they don't get past first (or second, or whatever) base until she's a year or two older. In her mind, the romance started immediately. In his mind, well, he's retrofitted his thoughts to believe whatever's convenient now. It may not violate the letter of the statutory rape law that way. But he'll be judged as if it did. Now, at the risk of being crude, the real problem here as I see it is that Rocket violated the first rule of groupies: Do what you like, you're the man, rich, famous, top of your profession, everyone loves you, you can do whatever you want, that's fine, it's a tradition that dates back to ancient Egypt. But don't ever, ever stick your dingle in the hoo-ha of someone crazier than you. It will only bring you insanely disproportionate amounts of grief.
Does the term "I cannot refute anything in the story" constitute an admission that the story is true, or does it mean that MS McCready cannot disprove anything in the story? There's a huge difference between those 2 interpretations. If she didn't have sex with him, she could certainly come out and say "I did not have sex with him". The fact that she says (through tears according to the article) "I cannot refute anything in the story" pretty much gives you your answer. Apparently she wasn't 15 when the "affair" happened though as it didn't happen until later (not when they first met). So at least we get statuatory rapist out of his profile if that's true (but bad husband and liar remains). The fact that he filed the suit anyway, knowing that he had stuff like this affair in his past, suggests to me that Clemens is (a) an enormous risk taker, and (b) egotistical enough to believe he can win any fight he undertakes. These traits lend credence to the idea that he took the equally stupid risk of lying to Congress. amen to that. And if he knows this Mindy thing is true, he KNOWS they will subpoena her to testify. Does he think she is dumb enough to lie to a federal jury too? For him? His egotism knows no bounds, apparently.
Just to keep tabs on this - McNamee claims Petite did steroids. Petite confirms. Turns out to be true - McNamee claims Clemen's wife did HGH (for a photoshoot). Clemens denies. Turns out to be true - Newspaper claims Clemens had affair with McCreedy. Clemens denies. McCreedy confirms it to be true. - McNamee claims Clemen's did HGH. Clemens denies. Who has the credibility here? Any reason we should be believing Roger here?
don't ever, ever stick your dingle in the hoo-ha of someone crazier than you chico, you inadvertently just made a great title for the memoirs of both Roger Clemens and Kevin Federline.
don't ever, ever stick your dingle in the hoo-ha of someone crazier than you chicobangs, I will also include that in my *talk* with my son, when the time comes. Priceless. And I'll say it just like that.
What smithnyiu said. That's sound advice even if you don't have groupies. Or a dingle.
I didn't mean for that to be gender-specific. Substitute dingle for hoo-ha, or vice versa, wherever appropriate.
But don't ever, ever stick your dingle in the hoo-ha of someone crazier than you Don't change a thing chico, that right there is classic!!
But don't ever, ever stick your dingle in the hoo-ha of someone crazier than you In other words, do your thinking with the larger of your 2 heads.
Is dyams really leaving?
He signed in to SpoFi today, so who knows. Maybe he just needed to blow off some steam.
But don't ever, ever stick your dingle in the hoo-ha of someone crazier than you. It will only bring you insanely disproportionate amounts of grief. I felt it would be best to include the full meaning of this very accurate statement. This is a truth which I have sadly learned without the benefit of being told. Divorce lawyers can be expensive. And I will be using this as my closing statement with my two boys during our "talk". I'll let mama (#2 wife=sane ) put it in her own words when she "talks" with our daughter. I submit this as evidence that good is being served with this thread.
I don't think this will be relevant to his defamation suit. I don't see anywhere in the complaint that he filed that he talks about his sterling reputation as a family man. I'll have to ask my buddy the lawyer, but my impression is that you don't have much control over what's asked of you in a deposition. One of the reasons you don't see many libel/defamation suits is that the plaintiff is opening himself up to scrutiny just as much as the defendant.
I don't think this will be relevant to his defamation suit. Well defamation is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim that may harm the reputation of an individual. This whole McCreedy thing is relevant because 1) it helps show a lack of credibility. He says the steroids claim is a lie. He also says this thing with McCreedy is a lie. If they were to put her on stand and she says it's true, that destroys his credibility (he lied about one to save face, why wouldn't he lie about the other to save face) 2) It would be harder to argue that the steroid claim harms his reputation if you can show his reputation isn't as shiny as he claims.
You can lay out some ground rules before the deposition is taken, but that's only if all parties agree to them. A really good attorney can also ask questions that can produce more information than you intended to give, like "are you still beating your wife". This latest revelation can only hurt Clemens in his defamation lawsuit, and in further legal proceedings. His credibility has taken a major hit, and there will be few people in a jury pool who will think the guy took a 15 year old girl to his hotel room for a nice chat. And, unless Mrs. Clemens already knew and forgave this little infidelity, Clemens better be shopping for a good divorce attorney. don't ever, ever stick your dingle in the hoo-ha of someone crazier than you I am simply green with envy about that statement.
If I'm wrong, I owe dyams a beer. I officially owe dyams a beer. MY PLAN ALL ALONG.
(I sang in bands and toured across North America for years. That advice is hard-learned.)
2) It would be harder to argue that the steroid claim harms his reputation if you can show his reputation isn't as shiny as he claims. The grounds for the suit is defamation per se, which means that Clemens doesn't have to prove damages because it is a statement about his professional character. It is true that depositions are more free form, but you can't ask questions just to embarrass the person being deposed. Clemens' lawyers would just instruct him not to answer.
It is true that depositions are more free form, but you can't ask questions just to embarrass the person being deposed No, but the simplest defense in a defamation suit is to prove that you were telling the truth. To do this, I would assume you would be allowed to show how the plaintiff is UN-truthful, so this line of questioning could be allowed if the right argument is made. Clemens' lawyers would just instruct him not to answer. But they can't stop McCreedy from answering when she is called (which they have already indicated that they will likely subpeona her).
I officially owe dyams a beer You buyin that beer at The Hired Hand?
From what I've heard, this is all specualation. Clemens has confirmed that he knows Mindy McCready and that she is a family friend and has been for quite some time. All of this information has been given out by Brian McNamee's lawyer, Richard Emery in order to make Clemens out to be a scumbag and also to make their case against Clemens that no one should believe what he has to say. This is a classic case of mudslinging that we've see in politics but of course this is just a ploy to misdirect people's attention into believing McNamee and not Clemens. Why do people still insist on treating clemens as a victim? How do people still give clemens the benefit of the doubt at this point? I'm not talking court of law here. I'm talking common sense. I don't give a damn about clemens cheating, but this isn't a shocker. There is almost nothing that could come out regarding clemens that I wouldn't at least give a large chance of being true. It's like clemens is this awful child that constantly lies but the fans are the clueless parents that believe him every single time. And even if proven wrong, gosh darn it he meant well. Is the idea that maybe clemens isn't a great family man that hard to believe? Hell, he's married to a woman that had a website preaching about staying fit and beautiful the natural way and doing it by was shooting up and getting breast implants (not that there's anything wrong with that). So maybe his family life, like most people's, isn't quite what it appears on the surface. Richard Emery isn't making clemens look like a scumbag; clemens is doing that all by himself. The only difference between Brian McNamee and Roger Clemens is that one has a great arm. Sure it's mudslinging, but Clemens would have done the same thing. After throwing everyone and his mother under the bus at the hearing and painting himself as someone with one fault, trusting too much, I'm positive that he'll eventually claim he was simply trying to help a young girl in tough times and he has not idea why she's turning on him. He's quite the humanitarian.
No, but the simplest defense in a defamation suit is to prove that you were telling the truth. To do this, I would assume you would be allowed to show how the plaintiff is UN-truthful, so this line of questioning could be allowed if the right argument is made. Showing that Clemens has lied about something completely unrelated would not help McNamee show that McNamee's statements are true. That's what the syringes are for. But they can't stop McCreedy from answering when she is called (which they have already indicated that they will likely subpeona her). The witness has to have something relevant to offer. How do people still give clemens the benefit of the doubt at this point? I thought it was run-of-the-mill misogyny - not a particular love of Clemens.
Of course this story is more evidence for where country singers get the material for all those maudlin he-done-me-wrong tunes. And The Hired Hand sounds like the name of a cheap massage joint. Or something.
