Roger's Rules of Evidence

The Associated Press is reporting that Brian McNamee turned over physical evidence linking Clemens to the use of performance enhancing drugs. The evidence includes vials (containing traces of steroids and HGH), blood stained syringes, and gauze pads. As I've noted before on The Foul Pole, I believe that Clemens used performance enhancing drugs and think that both on-field and off-field evidence makes a very solid case against Clemens. At first blush, should the DNA evidence verify that the blood belonged to Clemens, then it will be one more drop in the cascading flood of evidence. Yet, despite being a Clemens-hater, I'm particularly uncomfortable with this development. Brian McNamee has kept physical evidence against his avowed friend for seven years because (quoting the AP) "he feared Clemens would deny illicit drug use if the matter was ever investigated." Wow. That is some serious foresight on the part of McNamee. So, he anticipated a congressional (or other significant government) inquiry, his implication in the use of performance enhancing drugs, Clemens's implication and his denial, the potential for incarceration, and the need to produce evidence? Maybe he did. McNamee obviously kept some old stuff that most medical professionals throw away immediately after use. But, the link between Clemens blood and the vials of PEDs seems easily fabricated. Any lawyer would have a field day with physical evidence that appears in the hands of the person who has the greatest interest in proving the validity of his statements and, oh, by the way, the evidence is seven years old and likely kept in conditions unfavorable to the preservation of physical evidence.

The decision to produce the materials in the first place is likely a reflection of the value society places on physical evidence. It is considered neutral, disinterested, scientific, and, often, definitive. Yet, physical evidence can only tell part of the story and, in this case, the part of the story to be told (that Clemens used PEDs) doesn't seem particularly aided its production. I may be jumping the gun here since I don't know the full nature of the materials produced. But, I find the development a bit troubling as it sets up an easy target for Team Clemens to knock down and, in so doing, casting doubt on some of McNamee's stronger claims. In so doing, Clemens may be aided by McNamee's production of "corroborative physical evidence" rather than further indicted.