Hypothetical question

[King Richard]

So I was watching Mike and Mike this morning and they brought up an interesting topic about the Clemens/McNamee hearing. Specifically about how Pettitte "ratted out" Clemens to a degree testifying that Clemens in fact told him he used HGH and steroids. To make a long story short, both of the Mikes stated that both of them would most likely either lie under oath or plead ignorance to such a conversation they may or may not have had with a friend/family member 6-7+ years ago.

So the question is, what would you do?

I for one was in agreeance with the Mikes. I don't think I could ever rat out my best friend or a family member. Claiming that you don't remember technically is lying, however given the circumstance, would that be ok?

Anyways, what are your thoughts?

 

[The Ozzman]

I'd convince the person to tell the truth rather than lie under oath. I mean, if it was some random person, yeah I'd rat them the fuck out, but it would be way harder with a friend or relative.

 

[Zephyrus]

I really don't know, since I've never had such an experience. I guess it would depend on the gravity of the circumstances.

 

[waif]

except with something incredibly serious, like murder or something, I wouldn't rat out a friend.

 

[skeptik]

If I personally felt that what the person did was genuinely wrong and should be held accountable for it, I probably would tell the truth. But then again, in that situation, I probably wouldn't have kept it a secret to begin with.

 

[ThisIsACoolName]

So I was watching Mike and Mike this morning and they brought up an interesting topic about the Clemens/McNamee hearing. Specifically about how Pettitte "ratted out" Clemens to a degree testifying that Clemens in fact told him he used HGH and steroids. To make a long story short, both of the Mikes stated that both of them would most likely either lie under oath or plead ignorance to such a conversation they may or may not have had with a friend/family member 6-7+ years ago.

So the question is, what would you do?

I for one was in agreeance with the Mikes. I don't think I could ever rat out my best friend or a family member. Claiming that you don't remember technically is lying, however given the circumstance, would that be ok?

Anyways, what are your thoughts?

Mike and Mike are both shit heads. Pettitte "ratted out" Clemens? That's fucking rich. By not lying to the Government he's "ratting out" his friend? People have commended Pettitte for his honesty and what seems to be genuine remorse and desire to be part of the solution. Then these guys want to criticize him for it? They can both go fuck themselves.

Of course Pettitte did the right thing. He should never have cheated, obviously, but he is absolutely doing the right thing by being honest about it.

 

[AchrisK]

I think you need a more descriptive subject for this message.

 

[Dazed and Brutal]

At this point you're already caught so you might as well just be a respectable person and just let all of it out.

 

[seedofvengeance]

Well, it's not like Pettite is a saint. If he really cared, he would have spoke to George Mitchell when they asked him to. Also, if he cared about being a part of the "solution" why did he lie about doing it only once or twice?

No, I would not rat my friend out.

Do we all automatically assume that Clemens is guilty? I mean, I lean that way, but no one else has gone through this much trouble to clear their name.

 

[ThisIsACoolName]

Well, it's not like Pettite is a saint. If he really cared, he would have spoke to George Mitchell when they asked him to. Also, if he cared about being a part of the "solution" why did he lie about doing it only once or twice?

When did he lie? He even admitted to using HGH more than the Mitchell report said he did.

No, I would not rat my friend out.

It's not like it was MLB or some reporter asking him. It was the federal government.

Do we all automatically assume that Clemens is guilty? I mean, I lean that way, but no one else has gone through this much trouble to clear their name.

Either Clemens is lying or Pettitte is lying, and it sure as shit doesn't seem that it's Pettitte.

 

[seedofvengeance]

Pettite lied when he first came out by saying he only used it a few times. Since then it's come out that he used it much more than that.

On a subject that is not quite as serious, such as this, I would not rat a friend out. You can't get charged for perjury if you say "I don't remember."

And, like I said, I think Clemens did it... I've thought he was on steroids ever since his sudden resurgence which was followed shortly by him being mentioned in Canseco's book. I was just trying to spark some conversation.

 

[The Ozzman]

You can get charged for perjury if you say 'I don't remember' and there's proof that you had knowledge of it

 

[skeptik]

It's unfortunate, but I have to believe that Clemens is most likely guilty, as that's how the evidence seems to be going.

 

[seedofvengeance]

Perjury is the most difficult offense to convict someone of. They would have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that not only was Clemens guilty (which they can't do with Pettite's testimony) and that Pettite undoubtedly knew about it. That is almost physically impossible.

 

[cookiecutter]

Perjury is the most difficult offense to convict someone of. They would have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that not only was Clemens guilty (which they can't do with Pettite's testimony) and that Pettite undoubtedly knew about it. That is almost physically impossible.

True, but Clemens can kiss the hall of fame goodbye. It's a shame because he had it in the bag before he started on steroids.

 

[skeptik]

I think he should be allowed in for the weight of his career prior to when he began taking steroids, but of course that won't happen.

 

[seedofvengeance]

Same with Barry Bonds. I think they should get in, only with the tainted stats removed from their plaques. They were both great without it and deserve to be in there.

 

[ThisIsACoolName]

Pettite lied when he first came out by saying he only used it a few times. Since then it's come out that he used it much more than that.

What is "more than a few"? I don't think "a few" is a number.

On a subject that is not quite as serious, such as this, I would not rat a friend out. You can't get charged for perjury if you say "I don't remember."

He did remember though, and that's where his character comes in. At the Clemens hearing a big point was made about Pettitte being a very honest man, and given the apparent nature of what he confessed to, I'm inclined to believe that he is. So, when they asked him if Clemens ever talked about steroids to him, he told the truth. It seems to me that Pettitte simply did not want to lie anymore. Don't forget that this whole "stay loyal to your friends, never tell anyone anything" code of silence that exists in baseball is what has made the steroids issue such a difficult problem to solve.

I think he should be allowed in for the weight of his career prior to when he began taking steroids, but of course that won't happen.

Same with Barry Bonds. I think they should get in, only with the tainted stats removed from their plaques. They were both great without it and deserve to be in there.

I agree on both counts. Both were great, hall worthy players before they cheated. However, I suppose that's what makes their cheating so much more deplorable than the cheating of, say, Jay Gibbons.

 

[seedofvengeance]

I'm not saying that I would be right by lying, I'm just saying I would. I applaud Pettite for his current honesty, I just wouldn't do the same.

He said once or twice, I just said few. Sorry for that mix up.

 

[waif]

Is this a debate on baseball or on the morality of keeping secrets to protect your friends if they are guilty of something?

The former is a pointless waste of time. The latter is genuinely worth debating.