Clemens Trial: Comm 104


Published on

Extra credit Powerpoint for Comm 2014 class!

Published in: Sports, Spiritual
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Clemens Trial: Comm 104

  2. 2. SPECULATION • Former slugger Jose Canseco comes out with book Juiced: Wild Times, Rampant 'Roids, Smash Hits & How Baseball Got Big • Suggested that Clemens had expert knowledge about steroids and suggested that he used steroids, based on the improvement in his performance after leaving the Red Sox • Former teammates confirm statements • Former trainer Brian McNamee stated [Mitchell Report] that during the 1998, 2000 and 2001 baseball seasons, he injected Clemens with Winstrol
  3. 3. IMMEDIATE AFTERMATH: “TRUTH” QUESTIONED FROM BOTH DIRECTIONS • January 6, 2008 • Clemens appears on 60 Minutes to address the speculation and allegations regarding his steroid use during his later years in professional baseball • Explains that longevity in baseball was due to hard work rather than illegal substances • Denied all of McNamee's assertions that he injected Clemens with steroids • January 7, 2008 • Clemens filed a defamation lawsuit against McNamee, claiming that the former trainer lied after being threatened with prosecution
  4. 4. BRIEF TIMELINE TRIAL PROCEEDINGS • July 13, 2011 • Trial begins • Second day of testimony the judge in the case declares a mistrial over prosecutorial misconduct after prosecutors showed the jury prejudicial evidence they had been told not to show • June 18, 2012 • Clemens was found not guilty on all six counts of lying to Congress in 2008, when he testified that he never took performance-enhancing drugs
  5. 5. QUESTIONS TO THINK ABOUT.. • Q1) Why do you think Clemens pleaded not guilty to all six counts? Does this mean Clemens was telling the truth? • Q2) Can you speculate which arguments were presented to the jury in the most valid of angles? • Q3) Was it influenced by outside factors? • Q4) Put yourself in three of the major characters in this trial  How would you handle the proceedings? • Clemens • Former trainer and plaintiff Brian McNamee • Judge (ultimate outcome decision)
  6. 6. ADDITIONAL “FUN FACTS” TO THINK ABOUT PERSUATION POSSIBILITIES • This is in no way used to support the plaintiff side on the trial. It is, however, interesting and important as a critical thinker to dive beneath the surface of information and do some extra research • Clemens has attracted controversy over the years for his outspoken comments, such as his complaints about having to carry his own luggage through an airport • Clemens has received criticism for receiving special treatment from the teams that sign him. While playing for Houston, Clemens was not obliged to travel with the team on road trips if he was not pitching • Reported on a possible long-term relationship between Clemens and country music singer that began when she was 15 years old • There have been reports of at least three other relationships Clemens had with women, aside from his wife
  7. 7. FACTUAL REVIEW INTO DECISIONMAKING • Do these facts persuade you to feel strongly about a certain “truth” more than another? • What do the possible accusations against Clemens tell you about his possible behavior? Is it something that displays itself in the courtroom?
  8. 8. TRIAL AFTERMATH • Since the court argument failed to reach a verdict that found him guilty, Clemens’ found himself out of legal trouble that went into litigation for years on end • Truth has yet to be discovered in the trial proceedings, but what we do know, is that the more details the argument presents, the better. Without any evidence cited, the defendant had the upper hand immediately.