Complete non-story.

In my opinion, Clemens's lawsuit is frivolous and he is being less than candid about his PED use, but chain of custody issues will prevent the syringes from being admissible if there is ever a trial.

Yawn.

Lester Munson doesn't look a day older (well, a few more wrinkles in his forehead) since I met him in 1987.

Two things:

1) Where is a copy of the brief? It is a public record and available for less than a buck (not that I am going to spend it).

2) Munson never explicitly states that the syringes have traces of PED's. He leads by using the term "steroid paraphernalia", but there is nothing in the article that connects PED's to Clemens DNA. If there is nothing in the brief, then he should have mentioned that fact.

I agree it is a boring story, but I would hope that an attorney would pick up on these points.

Okay, just for fun I read the brief. Devin McCullen and Ray have it exactly right. This is a complete non-story. Either the reporter is dishonest or stupid, or both. ( It's not the Daily News, so it may just be stupid.) This motion has nothing to do with the DNA -- it's a motion to dismiss/transfer on the grounds that the case belongs in New York. (*) There is nothing new here; it's just a throwaway line in the introductory section of the brief that the materials "will" -- yes, Andere, "will," which means that the brief expresses no specific knowledge -- test positive. He basically singled out a single sentence out of a 50 page brief that had nothing to do with the purpose of the brief and which asserted no facts.

Incidentally, I'm not a Texas lawyer so I don't know how their courts have interpreted their particular long-arm statute, but McNamee's brief seems relatively persuasive to me on the issue of jurisdiction. (I say that without having read Clemens' opposition brief, though.)



(*) It also makes other arguments about the statements not being defamatory; these arguments are loony. (The only exception is his argument that the statements are privileged; it's an interesting argument that I'm not clear on.)

What's it been, 5 months since they sent these completely questionable syringes off to be tested?

Okay, just for fun I read the brief. Devin McCullen and Ray have it exactly right.

Oh, does that mean I don't have to read it, David? Because you're soooo famous for interpreting these things a simple, straightforward manner.

Maybe it's a cost thing. McNamee ain't exactly loaded, unless he has the upfront payment on his book deal already in his back pocket. My guess is it would cost about $300-400 to assay and sequence each sample.