New photographic evidence could prove damaging to Roger Clemens BY TERI THOMPSON, MICHAEL O'KEEFFE, CHRISTIAN RED and NATHANIEL VINTON DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITERS Friday, February 22nd 2008, 4:00 PM As the congressional committee that spent nine weeks considering Roger Clemens' attack on the Mitchell Report now quietly mulls referring the entire matter to the Justice Department, federal investigators seasoned in the anti-doping game are ready to hit the ground running. Their leads could include new photographic evidence that has emerged to potentially undermine Clemens' sworn testimony that he did not attend a 1998 party at the home of his then-teammate Jose Canseco - a party that figured both in the Mitchell Report and the Feb.13 public hearing in Washington. The photo is owned by a young man who attended the party when he was 11 years old and took photos of his baseball heroes, including Clemens. Richard Emery, one of the lawyers for Clemens accuser Brian McNamee, was aware that such evidence had been circulating this week. "We have reason to believe it's reliable evidence," Emery told the Daily News on Thursday. "We believe there's photographic evidence that shows Clemens was at a party he says he wasn't at." The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform does not necessarily have to make a formal request for the attorney general to initiate an investigation, although the committee may do so next week. Sources close to the case have told The News they expect the committee to refer the entire matter to the Justice Department rather than just refer Clemens. Ruh-roh
Another lie he's been caught in...... If he lies about attending a stupid party what else is he lying about? The guy is scum and I love watching him dig his own grave.
wow i wish roger would just grow some balls and admit what he did like andy. no turning back at this point. hes basically F'ed
This isn't really damaging to Clemens in terms of public opinion. Nobody is going to say "Oh Jesus. Don't fucking tell me he attended that party! Woah, before I totally thought he was clean but this is just the nail in the coffin." In terms of legal damage? Yeah, this could be very damaging to Clemens. I didn't actually watch the hearing on TV so I don't know if he directly said "I did not attend that party" or just sidestepped a question by saying he was golfing that day but if he explicitly denied being there then that qualifies as perjury.
Yeah, Roger is in a lot of trouble now. Federal purjury is bad business. Not smart Rocket. If you're going to lie, your tracks had better be covered.
i could care less whether or not he was at the party. he blatently lied about. that just destroys all credibility.
Well, if it turns out that Roger was lying (and it sure looks like he is), he deserves jail time in my opinion. I loved him as a Yankee, but if he is going this far about something he is actually lying about, I greatly disrespect him as a person.
