Jump to content

Brian McNamee = Zero credibility


GM

Recommended Posts

Despite his efforts to branch out, McNamee kept a low profile until October of 2001, when he was suddenly in the New York tabloids. According to police reports, an employee of a St. Petersburg, Fla., hotel where the Yankees were staying had noticed a man and a woman apparently having sex in the hotel pool, while another man looked on from a few feet away. All three were naked in the pool. One of the men, Charles Wonsowicz, the former St. John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one thing he has been CONSISTENT about is he does whatever he has to stay out of jail.

With that, it was fully explained to him that he was given immunity, AS LONG AS HE TOLD THE TRUTH.

It is literally a "get out of jail free" card. I could not fathom the circumstances that would make him want to lie about what he told the Mitchell group. There was not a reason to fabricate. To fabricate would be to his detriment. It would remove his immunity.

He has certainly told the truth about Pettite. Why would he change that tune in relation to Clemens? Tell the truth on some, lie about others? That doesn't make logical sense.

He certainly has gone a long way and become very imaginative if this is all indeed a lie. It would take some real initiative to go to those lengths. And why?

Is it because, as Clemens lawyesr claim, he is trying to sink Clemens personally?

If there was one thing out of that ridiculous phone call that Clemens taped, that I learned-It was that McNamee trailed Clemens like a puppy dog. Admired him. Was in awe of him. Still is to some degree. Why bury the man that you have mancrush over?

In the end (no pun intended), we may never know the truth. But, if som eone asked me who I have to believe at this point, based on known evidence and just the way things have evolved, McNamee seems much more truthful than Roger.

One man's opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one thing he has been CONSISTENT about is he does whatever he has to stay out of jail.

With that, it was fully explained to him that he was given immunity, AS LONG AS HE TOLD THE TRUTH.

It is literally a "get out of jail free" card. I could not fathom the circumstances that would make him want to lie about what he told the Mitchell group. There was not a reason to fabricate. To fabricate would be to his detriment. It would remove his immunity.

He has certainly told the truth about Pettite. Why would he change that tune in relation to Clemens? Tell the truth on some, lie about others? That doesn't make logical sense.

He certainly has gone a long way and become very imaginative if this is all indeed a lie. It would take some real initiative to go to those lengths. And why?

Is it because, as Clemens lawyesr claim, he is trying to sink Clemens personally?

If there was one thing out of that ridiculous phone call that Clemens taped, that I learned-It was that McNamee trailed Clemens like a puppy dog. Admired him. Was in awe of him. Still is to some degree. Why bury the man that you have mancrush over?

In the end (no pun intended), we may never know the truth. But, if som eone asked me who I have to believe at this point, based on known evidence and just the way things have evolved, McNamee seems much more truthful than Roger.

One man's opinion.

well said dierk. I really wanna believe roger but it makes no sense at all for macnamee to lie the wrong way about roger. it was mutually agreed on the phone he was thankful for all rogers help

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a purely scientific and forensic point of view any so-called evidence that mcnamee has is 100 pure garbage. There is no way that any of that would be admitted in court. There is no way to prove that he did not tamper with any of it, that he stored it properly. The dumbest thing Clemens could do would be to give them a fresh sample of that they could taint their evidence with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...