(Written while completely free of any performance enhancing drugs -- vodka being the very opposite I believe of a performance enhancing drug, though it may periodically persuade you otherwise.)
Roger Clemens, arguably the best pitcher of the last forty or so years, has seen his reputation tarnished with the release of the "Mitchell Report" on steroid use in baseball. In response, Clemens has filed a defamation suit against Brian McNamee, the former Yankee and Blue Jays strength coach, who has testified to injecting steroids into Clemens' buttocks (which you think you'd tend to remember.) In bringing his suit, Clemens appears to be taking a best defense is a good offense posture toward the scandal, a characteristically pugnacious approach for a man who never hesitated to throw hard and inside at enemy batters.
One wonders, however, if Clemens might consider the case of Oscar Wilde and how the bringing of an ill-advised legal action can have unforeseen and disastrous consequences for the party initiating litigation. [Having been a fan of Clemens for 23 years, I have serious doubts about the depth of his familiarity with Oscar Wilde -- not to mention his innocence.]
Wilde was accused of being a "somdomite" (yes even in the Nineteenth Century the homophobes were stupid) by John Sholto Douglas, the Ninth Marquess of Queensbury, who feared that "snob queers" were corrupting his son, Lord Alfred Douglas, who was in fact Wilde's lover. Wilde responded to the accusation by initiating a criminal libel action against the Marquess. And there his troubles began.
Wilde's action against Douglas was ultimately dismissed at trial and the facts adduced in the proceedings ultimately led to Wilde's arrest for "gross indecency," a charge on which he was subsequently found guilty and for which he was imprisoned for two years at hard labour.
If Clemens walks away from this defamation case and pleads the Fifth Amendment in any Congressional or federal investigation, he is unlikely to be in any jeopardy beyond having his athletic achievements tainted. However, should he testify either in the civil proceedings or in front of Congress, he risks the possibility of a perjury or obstruction of justice prosecution. And if he doesn't think this is dangerous, he might give Marion Jones a call.
The primary job of a good lawyer is to give sound counsel to a client, even if he doesn't want to hear what you are saying. I fear that Clemens's lawyers are doing their client's bidding without telling him the hard truths he needs to hear. Perhaps they might try a quote from Mr. Wilde himself: "No man is rich enough to buy back his past." Let it go Roger, let it go. And keep your mouth shut.
