Roger Clemens Injects A Defamation Suit Into the Mix
Thanks to the many readers who have alerted us to the lawsuit that Roger Clemens just filed against his ex-trainer. From the AP:
Roger Clemens beat Brian McNamee to court, filing a defamation suit against the former trainer who claimed to have injected him with performance-enhancing drugs.Clemens filed the suit Sunday night in Harris County District Court in Texas, listing 15 alleged statements McNamee made to the baseball drug investigator George Mitchell. Clemens claimed the statements were "untrue and defamatory."
"According to McNamee, he originally made his allegations to federal authorities after being threatened with criminal prosecution if he didn't implicate Clemens," according to the 14-page petition, obtained early Monday by The Associated Press.
You can review the petition here (PDF). One tipster writes:
Some miscellaneous notes: it will be interesting to see if Clemens is considered a "public figure." Further, something I didn't know about, even as a life-long New Yorker - Clemens was initially drafted by the New York Mets. Intriguing.
We'd think that Clemens would definitely qualify as a public figure. But given our line of work, we like to think of everyone as a public figure. In the internet age, we are all public figures now.
P.S. Thanks to the many readers who applied to serve as ATL's sports columnist. We are reviewing the many submissions and will select a columnist by the end of this week.
Clemens files defamation lawsuit against ex-trainer McNamee [AP]
Clemens v. McNamee: Complaint (PDF) [ESPN]
(18) 
First to say Ninja > Pirate > Overweight Over-the-hill Yankee Juicehead
We are not always first, but we are all Loyola 2L now as well.
lol... I wonder how long until there's a 911 call about a fire at 88 Delaware Avenue, Long Beach NY 11561
Note that the complaint ain't verified. So El Rockeeto has yet to deny McNamee's statements under oath.
Excellent legal analysis re: public figure. More like: more of the same from lazy queen resting-on-Yale-wachtell credentials.
Interesting complaint - not verified, not based on knowledge or information.
Even more interesting is that it doesnt name Mitchell or Conseco as defendants, or MLB for publishing the report.
This smacks of nothing more than PR and weak PR at that.
at least lat gave us something to talk about with Clemens...I haven't looked at the precedent to see if ol' Clems would be a public figure, but I assume he is.
I especially love the completely irrelevant allegations regarding his baseball career. His number was retired at UT-Austin! He threw a perfect game! His manager says he's a really good pitcher!
Sure he's a public figure. He did 60 minutes yesterday, which aired just before the law suit was filed.
I saw the segment, which shows him for what he really is, a lying cheater. At least Andy Petit was man enough to tell the truth about his drug use after the report came out; Clemens thinks that we actually believe his lies.
In my book, he's now worse than Bonds because he looked into the cameras in that interview and blatantly lied.
Look on youtube how he hedged when the question was put to him, "So you'll take a lie detector test to prove you didn't take steroids?" His response was, "um, sure, um, well, they tell me those things aren't conclusive, um, that they have problems... [big gulp from of bottled water]
Do you have to testify to matters under "pending litigation" to a Congressional subcommittee...
Yeah 12:00, it seems the standard for public figure was lower than I anticipated it would be. You can even fall ass backwards, basically, into becoming an "involuntary" or "limited" public figure.
The sports media keeps saying that McNamee might have a counterclaim - for what???
For defamation. And I threatened Clemens that we would file such a suit if he dared call my client a liar.
Nice to see that, notwithstanding all the time Clemens spent in New York City and Boston, he hired a Texas trial lawyer to represent him: Rusty Hardin, of Anna Nicole Smith and Arthur Andersen fame.
Screw you, Rusty!
Anna - is there anyone you DIDN'T screw?
You "tipster" states, "it will be interesting to see if Clemens is considered a 'public figure.'"
Huh? It won't be "interesting" at all. Anyone with even a cursory understanding of the interplay b/t the first amendment and defamation law will know that Roger Clemons clearly is a "public figure" under any possible understanding of that term. Come on Lat -- I expect more from a guy with your resume to post such a banal question.
If you're mentioned over a million times on ESPN, in the sports pages, and in other media each year, you're a public figure. Good luck Clemens.