Roger Clemens acquittal could boost Hall of Fame bid

Standards for conviction are clear in court, less so in baseball, where Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro have been bypassed for the Hall thus far despite distinguished careers.

Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP
Former Major League Baseball pitcher Roger Clemens smiles as he speaks to members of the media outside federal court in Washington, Monday, June 18. Clemens was acquitted on all charges by a jury that decided that he didn't lie to Congress when he denied using performance-enhancing drugs.

Acquitted in court, Roger Clemens must wait a half-year before finding out whether he cleared his name in the minds of Hall of Fame voters.

Standards for conviction are clear in court, less so in baseball, where Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro have been bypassed for the Hall thus far despite distinguished careers.

"I think the voters have already spoken, with McGwire and Palmeiro. I don't see him getting into the Hall of Fame as a first-year eligible," said ESPN reporter/analyst Tim Kurkjian, who plans to vote for Clemens.

Clemens was acquitted Monday in federal court in Washington, D.C., on six counts that he lied and obstructed Congress when he denied using performance-enhancing drugs.

"I think everybody believes he was guilty in some form or fashion," said John Harper of the New York Daily News, who doesn't plan to vote for Clemens. "I think that's the real issue as far as voters go. I know that's an issue for me."

Rusty Hardin, Clemens' defense attorney, said his client never fixated on whether or not he would gain admission to the Hall.

"You know, the Hall of Fame thing, that's always been other people's concern," Hardin said Tuesday morning during an appearance on CNN. "Roger has made clear that wouldn't have driven him. He wanted to be considered the greatest pitcher in the history of baseball. ...

"If he's judged in history by people in baseball to have been a great pitcher, that's good enough for him. If the writers decide to put him in the Hall of Fame, that's fine. If they don't, that's their call. This guy is one of the best people who happen to be also a great pitcher that I've ever known."

Clemens, Barry Bonds and Sammy Sosa all will be first-timers on the ballot, which in some ways will be a referendum on the Steroids Era. Mike Piazza, Curt Schilling and Craig Biggio also will be making their initial appearances.

"I haven't made any final decision on my votes, but my opinion has always leaned toward the idea that it is unfair to make Hall of Fame voters the steroids police," The Seattle Times' Larry Stone said. "We'll never know definitively who used and who didn't use, and MLB has never disallowed any statistics, so my inclination is to make judgments based on their performances on the field."

Asked about Clemens' chances for making the Hall, NBC's Bob Costas said: "A guilty verdict would have damaged his reputation. It remains to be seen how much or if this verdict helps it."

Costas doesn't cast a ballot; Hall of Fame voters are veteran members of the Baseball Writers' Association of America.

"I think some people will assume that he may very well have lied, but that the government couldn't prove it," former commissioner Fay Vincent said. "They may have real reservations about his record in light of those questions. But I think it modestly improves his chances of being elected to the Hall of Fame."

Clemens spent 4½ years proclaiming his innocence after Brian McNamee, his former personal trainer, told baseball investigator George Mitchell that he injected the pitcher with steroids and human growth hormone about 16 to 21 times during 1998, 2000 and 2001.

On Monday, a jury of eight women and four men agreed with Clemens, a seven-time Cy Young Award winner.

"I think it's great for the game because we can stop talking about it now," Yankees captain Derek Jeter said. "I'm pretty sure baseball fans are happy it's over."

Yankees pitcher Andy Pettitte, a longtime friend of Clemens and a key witness in the case, wouldn't give his opinion on the verdict, saying only: "I don't even care to talk about that." Pettitte was believed to have givenClemens a boost when he testified there was a 50-50 chance he might have misunderstood a conversation during the 1999-2000 offseason that the government claimed was proof Clemens admitted using HGH.

"We get all these trials out of the way, we can move on," said Yankees manager Joe Girardi, a formerClemens teammate. "Now, it seems like we're beyond it."

Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig declined to comment on the verdict. Union head Michael Weiner saidClemens was "vindicated."

"We look forward to him taking his rightful place in the Hall of Fame," Weiner said.

Vincent called it a "big win" for Clemens and his lawyer. "It's a major defeat for the Justice Department — one of a series," he said. "I think the government is at a huge disadvantage against really good outside lawyers."

Clemens is the latest sports figure to frustrate the federal government's efforts to nab suspected steroid cheats despite prosecution costs of tens of millions of dollars.

Bonds, a seven-time NL MVP, was convicted of a single obstruction of justice count that he gave an evasive answer to a grand jury in 2003, and charges were dropped last year that he made false statements when he denied using performance-enhancing drugs.

A grand jury investigation of Lance Armstrong was dropped last winter without charges being filed, though the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency filed formal accusations last week that could strip the seven-time Tour de France winner of his victories in cycling's premier race. Armstrong denies any doping.

Federal agent Jeff Novitzky and his teams of investigators have obtained only two guilty pleas from athletes (Olympic track star Marion Jones and former NFL defensive lineman Dana Stubblefield); and two convictions (Bonds and sprint cyclist Tammy Thomas). Jones, who also pleaded guilty to making false statements about her association with a check-fraud scheme, was the only targeted athlete to serve a day in prison.

Bonds' conviction still must survive an appeal.

Clemens has no such worries. With a 354-184 record, 3.12 ERA and 4,672 strikeouts, he would have been a sure first-ballot Hall of Famer when the votes are totaled in January. But since the day the Mitchell Report was released, his reputation has been tainted by suspicion.

Still, Cleveland Indians pitcher Josh Tomlin was thrilled for Clemens, one of his boyhood heroes growing up in Texas.

"If a case goes on that long and the jury decides he's not guilty, then obviously he's telling the truth," he said.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.