Steroid News
News bot on steroids
Contradictions in Book Seem to Benefit Clemens
[SIZE=-1]New York Times, United States [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]In light of the contradictions Radomski is creating with his book, legal experts said the government would probably think twice about using Radomski as a witness if Clemens were indicted and were to go on trial.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]In a perjury case a prosecutors worst nightmare is for a witness to make public statements that contradicts another witness, especially the key witness in the case, said Mathew Rosengart, a partner at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips in New York and a former federal prosecutor. Perjury cases are almost always a he-said, she-said dispute, and there usually isnt a smoking gun, so corroboration of witnesses is essential. The questions about Radomski are a good thing for Clemenss defense.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Daniel Richman, a professor of law at Columbia University and, like Rosengart, a former federal prosecutor, echoed Rosengarts concerns. Every inaccuracy or inconsistency will provide material for the defense for cross-examination, Richman said. And they will use it to create doubt in the jurys mind about Radomski and by extension McNamee.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]In his book, Radomski writes that he was introduced on the telephone to McNamee in 1999 by the player David Segui. At the time, McNamee was the strength and conditioning coach for the Toronto Blue Jays. Sometime after they met in person about a year later, Radomski said, McNamee told him that he had injected Clemens with the steroid Winstrol in 1998.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]McNamee told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that he began injecting Clemens in 1998 with steroids that Clemens had obtained on his own. To that extent, his account conforms with Radomskis. However, according to a transcript of his deposition, he said that he never told Radomski he had done so. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]...[/SIZE]
More...
[SIZE=-1]New York Times, United States [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]In light of the contradictions Radomski is creating with his book, legal experts said the government would probably think twice about using Radomski as a witness if Clemens were indicted and were to go on trial.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]In a perjury case a prosecutors worst nightmare is for a witness to make public statements that contradicts another witness, especially the key witness in the case, said Mathew Rosengart, a partner at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips in New York and a former federal prosecutor. Perjury cases are almost always a he-said, she-said dispute, and there usually isnt a smoking gun, so corroboration of witnesses is essential. The questions about Radomski are a good thing for Clemenss defense.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Daniel Richman, a professor of law at Columbia University and, like Rosengart, a former federal prosecutor, echoed Rosengarts concerns. Every inaccuracy or inconsistency will provide material for the defense for cross-examination, Richman said. And they will use it to create doubt in the jurys mind about Radomski and by extension McNamee.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]In his book, Radomski writes that he was introduced on the telephone to McNamee in 1999 by the player David Segui. At the time, McNamee was the strength and conditioning coach for the Toronto Blue Jays. Sometime after they met in person about a year later, Radomski said, McNamee told him that he had injected Clemens with the steroid Winstrol in 1998.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]McNamee told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that he began injecting Clemens in 1998 with steroids that Clemens had obtained on his own. To that extent, his account conforms with Radomskis. However, according to a transcript of his deposition, he said that he never told Radomski he had done so. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]...[/SIZE]
More...
