Pay Mookie!

[mvp 78]

We didn't really know how much Clemens was going to benefit from the juice, though.

 

His career definitely skyrocketed after he switched off Hawaiian Punch to the other juice.

[mvp 78]

The guy was a cheating, scumbag child molester.

 

What's that last part?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

The guy was a cheating, scumbag child molester.

 

... Ninja, roid-raging, bat-barrel Piazza-throwing, Dave Stewart-playoff-losing, IN-THE-SHOWAH..........RAAAAAAAAAAAH-----JERRRRRRKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK!!!!!!

[Slasher9]

i will say this for Clemens....he does still give some time to Jimmy Fund.

[mvp 78]

i will say this for Clemens....he does still give some time to Jimmy Fund.

 

Is that the child molester part?

[Elktonnick]

The guy was a cheating, scumbag child molester.

 

Do you have proof about the child abuse allegation?

[Slasher9]

Do you have proof about the child abuse allegation?

 

he supposedly smashed out an underage girl. i think it got swept under the rug.

[Elktonnick]

he supposedly smashed out an underage girl. i think it got swept under the rug.

 

Unless one has proof or the alleged accused had been convicted then such a charge on a public web site could be considered slander and libel.

[moonslav59]

Do you have proof about the child abuse allegation?

 

When a guy admits he crossed the line, I'm thinking he didn't admit it all.

 

He lives in my hometown (Sugar Land), and people here know he's a scumbag.

 

To answer your question, no.

 

Here's a couple articles I found...

 

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/mindy-mccready-weeps-confirms-affair-roger-clemens-article-1.283955

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/mindy-mccready-speaks-roger-clemens-123162

 

https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2019/11/20/20972682/roger-clemens-mindy-mccready-ped-hall-of-fame-character-clause-mlb-hot-stove

[moonslav59]

Unless one has proof or the alleged accused had been convicted then such a charge on a public web site could be considered slander and libel.

 

Even if they had no sex, he's a scumbag.

 

Really, conviction is the only proof of guilt?

 

Rich people pay their way out of convictions all the time.

[mvp 78]

McCready told "Inside Edition" she met Clemens when she was 16, not 15, as reported by the Daily News in April. She told the TV newsmagazine they met in a karaoke bar, that her relationship with the pitcher didn't turn sexual until several years later and that the relationship lasted for a decade.

[moonslav59]

McCready told "Inside Edition" she met Clemens when she was 16, not 15, as reported by the Daily News in April. She told the TV newsmagazine they met in a karaoke bar, that her relationship with the pitcher didn't turn sexual until several years later and that the relationship lasted for a decade.

 

So, he's not a scumbag for hiding his relationship from his wife, taking her on vacations and taking advantage of he youth and situation?

 

Like I said, even if he never had sex until she was 18, which I doubt, he's still a scumbag.

 

He also lied about PED use and more.

[Elktonnick]

Even if they had no sex, he's a scumbag.

 

Really, conviction is the only proof of guilt?

 

Rich people pay their way out of convictions all the time.

 

You had no proof no convictions. It was libelous slander. If I were you I'd hope Clemens doesn't read this website or is not the litigious type.

[mvp 78]

So, he's not a scumbag for hiding his relationship from his wife, taking her on vacations and taking advantage of he youth and situation?

 

Like I said, even if he never had sex until she was 18, which I doubt, he's still a scumbag.

 

He also lied about PED use and more.

 

He can be a scumbag for that sure, but I don't see much evidence about the child predator stuff. Maybe they did hook up when she was 16? We'll never really know.

[moonslav59]

McCready told "Inside Edition" she met Clemens when she was 16, not 15, as reported by the Daily News in April. She told the TV newsmagazine they met in a karaoke bar, that her relationship with the pitcher didn't turn sexual until several years later and that the relationship lasted for a decade.

 

Also...

 

McCready was quoted by the Daily News as saying: "I didn't want to get married to him, and I don't want to get married now. He should have done right by his family -- a person is unhappy in their marriage and spending all their personal time with someone else, you need to do right by your marriage. He should have just told Debbie and been honest with her. If he didn't want to be with her and wanted to be with me, he should have told her."

 

and

 

“I cannot refute anything in the story.”

Edited February 10, 2020 by moonslav59

[moonslav59]

He can be a scumbag for that sure, but I don't see much evidence about the child predator stuff. Maybe they did hook up when she was 16? We'll never really know.

 

16 not 15 is not the issue.

[mvp 78]

Also...

 

McCready was quoted by the Daily News as saying: "I didn't want to get married to him, and I don't want to get married now. He should have done right by his family -- a person is unhappy in their marriage and spending all their personal time with someone else, you need to do right by your marriage. He should have just told Debbie and been honest with her. If he didn't want to be with her and wanted to be with me, he should have told her."

 

I still don't see any child abuse claims though?

[Elktonnick]

I still don't see any child abuse claims though?

 

Neither do I.

[Slasher9]

pretty sure it's sexual abuse if the girl is under 18? epstein would be able to tell you...

[moonslav59]

pretty sure it's sexual abuse if the girl is under 18? epstein would be able to tell you...

 

If they had sex, and we may never know for sure, it's "abuse" due to her age.

 

I seriously doubt Roger brought her alone with him on vacations multiple times and nothing intimate happened.

 

He was her cash cow that allowed her to buy drugs and spiral out of control. Why would she tell on him, when it was likely consensual but nevertheless abuse due to her age.

 

[Elktonnick]

If they had sex, and we may never know for sure, it's "abuse" due to her age.

 

I seriously doubt Roger brought her alone with him on vacations multiple times and nothing intimate happened.

 

He was her cash cow that allowed her to buy drugs and spiral out of control. Why would she tell on him, when it was likely consensual but nevertheless abuse due to her age.

 

 

Allegations aren't proof.

[sk7326]

Allegations aren't proof.

 

She confirmed independent reporting of their relationship. Given the nature of these things, and how badly women who report are treated, it seems to fair to take her at her word here.

[moonslav59]

Okay, Roger took her alone on vacations from 16-18, then started getting intimate. He waited 2 years. What a good guy!

 

Hip, hip Horray!

[Elktonnick]

Okay, Roger took her alone on vacations from 16-18, then started getting intimate. He waited 2 years. What a good guy!

 

Hip, hip Horray!

 

I still wouldn't go around calling someone a child molester without either prima facia evidence or formal adjudication in a court of law anymore than I would call a public figure who owns one of the leading liberal news publications in the east a Nazi unless I had a very prominent and skilled trial lawyer on retainer.

[moonslav59]

I still wouldn't go around calling someone a child molester without either prima facia evidence or formal adjudication in a court of law anymore than I would call a public figure who owns one of the leading liberal news publications in the east a Nazi unless I had a very prominent and skilled trial lawyer on retainer.

 

He's a scumbag that preyed on a vulnerable 16 year old girl. I'd bet my left nut something intimate happened before she was 18.

 

IMO, she didn't say anything, as many don't, because it was a consensual relationship and he gave her tons of money and took her to nice places.

 

He cheated on his wife and family. He's a known liar and cheat.

 

Your court of law position assumes rich people aren't able to game the system. Look how long guys like Epstien and Harvey got away with abuses. Look at Michael Jackson.

 

I firmly believe Clemens is a child molester. If he wants to sue me, he can.

 

I get the desire to defend the rule of law, but we all should agree he's a scumbag, even if no sex happened until age 18 (wink wink).

 

[Elktonnick]

He's a scumbag that preyed on a vulnerable 16 year old girl. I'd bet my left nut something intimate happened before she was 18.

 

IMO, she didn't say anything, as many don't, because it was a consensual relationship and he gave her tons of money and took her to nice places.

 

He cheated on his wife and family. He's a known liar and cheat.

 

Your court of law position assumes rich people aren't able to game the system. Look how long guys like Epstien and Harvey got away with abuses. Look at Michael Jackson.

 

I firmly believe Clemens is a child molester. If he wants to sue me, he can.

 

I get the desire to defend the rule of law, but we all should agree he's a scumbag, even if no sex happened until age 18 (wink wink).

 

 

BTW what you are alleging is statutory rape not child abuse. In most States Child Abuse means the alleged abuser must be either be a caregiver or in a position of authority over the victim such as a teacher or a coach.

[sk7326]

BTW what you are alleging is statutory rape not child abuse. In most States Child Abuse means the alleged abuser must be either be a caregiver or in a position of authority over the victim such as a teacher or a coach.

 

Problem solved then!

[Kimmi]

I'd be unwilling to give any player a 13 year contract or even a 12 year one. The Sox offered $30 mil for 10 years. i would have gone a little higher for 8 years but still really dislike what that does to payroll flexability. Betts is gone and we are unlikely to get him back. Be interesting to see how many of these very large extended contracts work out for the teams that offer them.

 

I know many are hopeful that we can sign Betts as a free agent, now that we've reset the tax penalty. I really, really hope we do not. Tying that much money up in one player is not a good idea.

 

There are better ways to construct a roster with that kind of money.

[Kimmi]

Of all the non-Trout big name free agents who have signed (or will ink) megadeals in the past decade, I think Mookie is the surest bet to actually earn most of his next contract.

 

He's a better player than Harper, a better character than Machado, and provides more ways to win than Stanton, Pujols, Cabrera, or any pitcher (and won't be tainted like ARod).

 

I feel Mookie's career and contract will be defined by his performance over the next half decade, during which time I fully expect him to produce another 30 WAR and lead his new club to at least 450 wins. If he helps win another World Series, it will be worth it to that franchise and its fan base.

 

Boston losing Betts can't be as bad as losing Babe Ruth, but I fear it will be the biggest Red Sox mistake since -- one that media and rival fans will haunt our sons with for a long time... especially, if the Bosox blow much of their savings on free agent busts filling unavoidable voids, trying to win back fans.

 

Giving away Bagwell while a prospect was bad enough, but the Red Sox had a HOFer about to enter his prime... and couldn't keep him.

 

Almost everyone said that same thing about Price, that he was more of a sure bet as an 'aging' pitcher than any other pitchers. After a couple of years, many of those same people wanted him off the team, and almost everyone is now glad to be rid of him, even with the Sox paying half of his salary.

[Bellhorn04]

Almost everyone said that same thing about Price, that he was more of a sure bet as an 'aging' pitcher than any other pitchers. After a couple of years, many of those same people wanted him off the team, and almost everyone is now glad to be rid of him, even with the Sox paying half of his salary.

 

And people would bail out on Mookie the same way if wasn't living up to his enormous pay checks.