Extra credit Powerpoint for Comm 2014 class!

1. By: Jordan Russ
WHAT IS TRUTH?
THE ROGER CLEMENS TRIAL
TRUTH & VALIDITY INTERTWINED

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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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.