Jump to content

Frank must testify at Thursday's hearings


aboz56
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2014024

 

NEW YORK -- Jason Giambi was excused from testifying at Thursday's congressional hearing into steroid use in baseball, but attempts by Rafael Palmeiro and Frank Thomas to avoid appearing were rejected.

 

Giambi does not have to come to Washington because of his involvement in the ongoing federal investigation into illegal steroid distribution, House Government Reform committee chairman Tom Davis and ranking Democrat Henry Waxman said. The New York Yankees slugger testified before a grand jury in the case in 2003.

 

"I appeared in front of the federal grand jury a year ago. I answered every question, told the truth and cooperated fully," Giambi said in a statement released by his agent. "I appreciate that the members of the committee evaluated my situation, and I will now continue to focus on playing the best baseball I possibly can for the Yankees and our great fans."

 

Four people were indicted in the case, and trial dates have not yet been scheduled.

 

Barry Bonds and Gary Sheffield, who also testified before the grand jury, were not among the seven current and former players subpoenaed by the committee last week.

 

"From the outset, we have said that we in no way wanted our inquiry to impede or complicate any ongoing investigations by law enforcement," Davis and Waxman said in a statement Tuesday. "Therefore, upon hearing today from the Justice Department that Mr. Giambi's appearance could do just that, we have decided to excuse him from testifying. All other invited witnesses, however, will be expected to comply with the subpoenas issued to them last week."

 

The committee accepted baseball commissioner Bud Selig's offer to testify, according to Rob Manfred, executive vice president for labor relations in the commissioner's office. Manfred also will testify along with Sandy Alderson, a baseball executive vice president who is former general manager of the Oakland Athletics, and current San Diego Padres general manager Kevin Towers.

 

Manfred said union head Donald Fehr will be on the same panel.

 

Former AL MVP Jose Canseco, whose recent book accuses several stars of steroid use, also will testify. Curt Schilling said Tuesday he hoped to be excused but would comply with the subpoena if he had to.

 

"When you get subpoenaed, you don't have a choice," he said.

 

It remained unclear whether Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Palmeiro and Thomas would comply with their subpoenas.

 

"Anything can happen," one source told ESPN.com's Jayson Stark. The source also says attorneys for the seven players have been conferring, but negotiating individually, with the House committee on government reform.

 

So it would not be accurate to speculate that all of these players will reach the same decision, or take the same course of action, on whether to appear, the source said.

 

"There has been a lot of dialogue," he said. "But at the end of the day, these guys are going to do what they think they've got to do, out of whatever choices there are. It won't be a case of all [seven] guys showing up or all of them not showing up."

 

Another source told Stark that players have been negotiating with the committee on a variety of subjects, ranging from potential grants of immunity to limiting the nature of what questions can appropriately be asked.

 

But one baseball man familiar with those negotiations says players have not been offered any form of immunity so far.

 

"If that's a card in the game," he said, "it's been held very close to the vest."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That sucks. They better letter him give his deposition in Tucson or this will feed into yet another White Sox conspiracy. This time by Congress.

 

Giambi should have to appear if for no other reason then to tell every highschooler stay away from performance enhancing drugs. It's senseless why he's not appeaing. The Boss must have made some kind of deal.

Maybe donated to campaigns or something.

 

Do they fear Thomas' return to ChiSox that much?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to sound like an idiot, but what exactly are these players looking to gain immunity from? Is this implying that charges are going to be filed and punishments handed down? For what?

 

As much as I really would love to hear some of these cheaters admit to their past indiscretions, I really don't agree with my tax money paying for an investigation. I don't understand the goal here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(mmmmmbeeer @ Mar 15, 2005 -> 06:56 PM)
I hate to sound like an idiot, but what exactly are these players looking to gain immunity from?  Is this implying that charges are going to be filed and punishments handed down?  For what? 

 

As much as I really would love to hear some of these cheaters admit to their past indiscretions, I really don't agree with my tax money paying for an investigation.  I don't understand the goal here.

 

Steroid use outside of a doctor's prescription is illegal. If you admit to using steroids in a public hearing you leave yourself open to prosecution. If you deny using them and it is proved later that you did use them, you leave yourself open to a perjury charge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Mar 15, 2005 -> 10:39 PM)
I haven't read the other Thomas threads, but I was watching Sportscenter at 6, and they said Frank could just do his part via a satellite due to his ankle.

Then, Schilling would want to do that as well because of his ankle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the way I see things happening:

 

Congressman Davis: Mr. Palmeiro, did you, at any time ever use steroids or human growth hormone to enhance your major league career.

 

Palmeiro: I refuse to answer, citing the 5th amendment.

 

Davis: You have immunity from prosecution on this issue. Answer the question.

 

Palmeiro: (under his breath) Oh s***.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congress has better things to do. Unless the cops or the feds want to arrest these guys for steroids. Otherwise, leave this to major league baseball for christ sake.

 

Plus for cripes sake, why put Thomas and Schlling in the same group with all these guys accused of being on roids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Mar 16, 2005 -> 01:49 AM)
Congress has better things to do.  Unless the cops or the feds want to arrest these guys for steroids.  Otherwise, leave this to major league baseball for christ sake.

 

Plus for cripes sake, why put Thomas and Schlling in the same group with all these guys accused of being on roids.

 

On one hand, I agree with you. Congress has plenty more important things to worry about. On the other hand, I'm glad baseball is not being allowed to sweep this under a rug. I'd still like to see a tougher and more comprehensive testing program. I'd love baseball to go back to a somewhat closer version of the game that I grew up watching. Perhaps, this congressional investigation will be a catalyst that leads to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thomas with reservations....... because of his ankle;

 

As the date got closer, Thomas was having reservations, but not because he didn't want to answer questions about steroids. Thomas has been a big proponent the last five years of banning steroids in baseball.

 

His concern was his ankle.

 

The 36-year-old Thomas is recovering from Oct. 6 surgery to repair a partial stress fracture of the navicular bone in the left ankle, and air travel apparently causes the ankle to swell.

 

Thomas was hoping a Congressional representative could be sent to Tucson to interview him, but that was wishful thinking.

 

"I'd rather have kept him here, but I can't butt heads with Congress," Sox trainer Herm Schneider said.

 

Schneider said Thomas was fitted with a compression sleeve on the ankle in hopes of minimizing potential swelling. Schneider also said that while Thomas' rehab has been productive, there have been expected "speed bumps" in the recovery.

 

"He has to understand that there are speed bumps on the road," Schneider said. "He has to deal with that."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 16, 2005 -> 12:37 AM)
Here's the way I see things happening:

 

Congressman Davis:  Mr. Palmeiro, did you, at any time ever use steroids or human growth hormone to enhance your major league career.

 

Palmeiro:  I refuse to answer, citing the 5th amendment.

 

Davis:  You have immunity from prosecution on this issue.  Answer the question.

 

Palmeiro: (under his breath) Oh s***.

 

That's an interesting scenario. If you are testifying under immunity, can you still exersize your fifth amendment rights? Anyone know how that works?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 16, 2005 -> 07:05 AM)
That's an interesting scenario.  If you are testifying under immunity, can you still exersize your fifth amendment rights?  Anyone know how that works?

 

My understanding is the 5th Amendment protects you from self incrimination. Because they have immunity, the person could not incriminate themselves in any crime. Therefor, they must answer the question truthfully or be subject to perjury charges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(mmmmmbeeer @ Mar 15, 2005 -> 06:56 PM)
I hate to sound like an idiot, but what exactly are these players looking to gain immunity from?  Is this implying that charges are going to be filed and punishments handed down?  For what? 

 

As much as I really would love to hear some of these cheaters admit to their past indiscretions, I really don't agree with my tax money paying for an investigation.  I don't understand the goal here.

 

I think this will be a deterent to people using or thinking of using steroids. If they see how these stars are being treated, and having to face potential prosecution and ridicule/embarrassment, it might make them think twice. Whether this happens or not, who knows. I think making an example can be a good thing.

 

I'm guessing that is congress's goal, in addition to not allowing baseball to just 'move on' after doing pretty much nothing, including coming up with a steroid policy that is so weak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Mar 16, 2005 -> 01:49 AM)
Congress has better things to do.  Unless the cops or the feds want to arrest these guys for steroids.  Otherwise, leave this to major league baseball for christ sake.

 

Plus for cripes sake, why put Thomas and Schlling in the same group with all these guys accused of being on roids.

 

A very high profile American industry may have been systematically violating federal drug laws. Seems like a good place for congress to take a look.

 

Thomas and Schilling are examples of how to do it right. That should come out in the coverage. I would want a "victim" to come forward. Mr. Thomas you finished second in the MVP voting to a known steroid user, do you feel cheated? Powerful message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 16, 2005 -> 08:23 AM)
A very high profile American industry may have been systematically violating federal drug laws. Seems like a good place for congress to take a look.

 

Thomas and Schilling are examples of how to do it right. That should come out in the coverage. I would want a "victim" to come forward. Mr. Thomas you finished second in the MVP voting to a known steroid user, do you feel cheated? Powerful message.

 

 

Not only that, but a Congressional Anti-Trust exemption is the reason that baseball has been able to get away with doing nothing for so long. Any other entity would have been subject to investigations and other problems. Not baseball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Immunity means the person can not be charged with a specific crime that is clearly identified prior to the deposition. In this case, the use of illegal steriods. However; the person can still be charged for perjury or other crimes that might arise. For example, Canseco might recieve immunity from use of illegal steriods but he could be charged for wreckless endangerment & speeding as cited in his book. That would depend on the statute of limitations in that state.

 

It just stinks but there's not a lot that can be done about it. Tucson would have been a nice option. As I understand all the players involved in the BALCO investigation are exempt from this inquiry because anything they would say could jeapordize the case pending against BALCO. It could be used to disqualify jurors & make it very difficult to prosecute the case.

 

So the good guys get screwed, the bad guys play on, & the questionable guys have the most to lose. American justice at it's best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 16, 2005 -> 07:05 AM)
That's an interesting scenario.  If you are testifying under immunity, can you still exersize your fifth amendment rights?  Anyone know how that works?

 

 

 

No immunity... lots of pleading the 5th tomorrow I imagine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...