by Long Island Attorney Paul A. Lauto, Esq.

We all knew that the day would come when baseball's steroid era would be knocking on the Cooperstown, NY Baseball Hall of Fame doors.  The recent release of 2013 candidate names, signalled that day has effectively arrived.

It must now be decided whether or not use of performance enhancing drugs, suspected or otherwise, should preclude a qualified baseball player's entrance into the coveted Hall of Fame.  In the forefront of this heated debate are first time ballots for Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Sammy Sosa and Mike Piazza.  Based on statistical merits alone, all four of these players appear qualified for entry.  However, a player's "character" is an important criteria in determining Hall of Fame entrance. 

Regardless of whether or not a player's use or suspected use of steroids was before or after MLB enacted a rule prohibiting such use, the fact remains that most anabolic steroids were deemed to be a controlled substance back in 1991.  Possession of such anabolic steroids is a federal offense punishable by up to one year in prison and a minimum fine of $1,000.  Dealing or trafficking of such anabolic steroids is punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.

While this author will not pretend to know the definitive answer to this quandry, it seems that suspicion of use alone should not preclude entrance.  If for example a player's career prior to the steroid era would have more than qualified that player for the Hall, then suspicion of use alone should not be prohibitive.  However, admission of or proven use of a controlled substance without a prescription warrants different consideration.

Clearly numerous factors must be considered in determining a player's eligibility for the Hall.  Whatever decision is made, it should maintain the integrity of America's past time so as not to diminish the accomplishments of baseball immortals such as Ruth, Gherig, DiMaggio, Aaron, Williams, Mantle, Robinson and Clemente.

Long Island Lawyer
Paul A. Lauto, Esq.

According to a former FDNY Lieutenant, he received more than what he paid for when attending a Yankee game this past May with his son.   When the former Lieutenant objected to a man sitting in his son's seat, the man and his brother, allegedly grabbed him in a chokehold and beat him down to the ground.  

A law suit was filed for personal injuries in Supreme Court against the Yankees, claiming that the assailants were both intoxicated and that they were served alcoholic drinks notwithstanding.  

This case demonstrates the serious nature of serving alcohol to an intoxicated party.  Whether you are a bartender or a homeowner hosting a party, alcohol must not only be consumed responsibly but served responsibly as well.  To do otherwise is to risk potential liability for any causally related injuries and damages.

Lomg Island Lawyer
Paul A. Lauto, Esq.

Let's face it, most people who care enough to form an opinion about Roger Clemens and baseball's steroid era, have already reached their own personal verdict.  So why are our valuable tax dollars being spent to retry Roger Clemens for alleged perjury and obstruction of Congress?  

The first trial came to an abrupt end when U.S. attorneys presented video evidence to the jury, that had previously been ruled inadmissible.  The judge  indicated that this was a mistake a " first year law student" would not have made.  As a result, the U.S Attorney's office was undoubtedly embarrassed and suffered credibility damage.

So perhaps the real reason countless tax dollars are again being spent in this matter, is more about ego and image rehabilitation than anything else.  It appears in today's poor economy, that there are numerous better uses for our tax dollars than the retrial of Roger Clemens.

Long Island Lawyer
Paul A. Lauto, Esq.