Albert suing Jack Clark

[mtangelsfan]

So you are disrespecting him by using a different name than what he prefers.

 

Interesting.

[Glen]

So you are disrespecting him by using a different name than what he prefers.

 

Interesting.

 

 

Jose Alcantara is the new Rogelio Chavez.

[Ohtaniland]

So you are disrespecting him by using a different name than what he prefers.

 

Interesting.

 

That's the name used by Clark's attorney.  

 

If Albert were still on the Cardinals, I think this discussion would be completely different.

[mtangelsfan]

That is a silly statement, if he was still on the Cardinals we wouldn't even be having this conversation and Clark likely doesn't even make the comment.

[Ohtaniland]

That is a silly statement, if he was still on the Cardinals we wouldn't even be having this conversation and Clark likely doesn't even make the comment.

 

No MT, I remember the old board talking about this very subject many times. All speculation of course. I'm glad that Albert will have an opportunity to clear his good name or names.

[mtangelsfan]

It doesn't seem like you are though.  Your choice to use the name Clark's attorney is using and your suggestions that Albert is in trouble seems to imply that you are getting some pleasure from this and that you want to see Albert fall.

 

All this because he hasn't performed as well as you want him too. 

[Ohtaniland]

It doesn't seem like you are though.  Your choice to use the name Clark's attorney is using and your suggestions that Albert is in trouble seems to imply that you are getting some pleasure from this and that you want to see Albert fall.

 

All this because he hasn't performed as well as you want him too. 

 

MT, I don't have a horse in this race. I posted earlier in this thread that I wish this would all go away so he can focus on 2014. But it's always about Albert and that just might be the core problem with the team and his performance.

[mtangelsfan]

Then why the continual use of the other name?  Why the continual hints that he is definitely in trouble?

[Ohtaniland]

Then why the continual use of the other name?  Why the continual hints that he is definitely in trouble?

 

I think I explained that in post #79. His own attorney opened that up for interpretation. 

[Bruce Nye]

Unless there is hard evidence, this case is going nowhere.  If Clark apologizes and pays Pujols some dough for charity, this is over.

 

Clark should have the common sense not to repeat something without basis.

[Ohtaniland]

Unless there is hard evidence, this case is going nowhere.  If Clark apologizes and pays Pujols some dough for charity, this is over.

 

Clark should have the common sense not to repeat something without basis.

 

The train has already left the station. If Clark hasn't apologized by now then he has reason to believe he can win this.

[markb]

That's the name used by Clark's attorney.  

 

In a mocking tone, just like the rest of his letter that reads like something fished out of the reject bin at The Onion.  

 

I'd also assume that a lawyer of such sharp wit knows that polygraph tests are pseudoscience, hence they're repeatedly rejected in court.  

Edited October 14, 2013 by markb

[Lifetime]

The train has already left the station. If Clark hasn't apologized by now then he has reason to believe he can win this.

LOL you really believe that?

[Ohtaniland]

In a mocking tone, just like the rest of his letter that reads like something fished out of the reject bin at The Onion.  

 

I'd also assume that a lawyer of such sharp wit knows that polygraph tests are pseudoscience, hence they're repeatedly rejected in court.  

 

Polygraphs are voluntary so if either party has nothing to hide. Why not? A polygraph on Chris Mihlfeld might be of interest.

[AngelsLakersFan]

LOL you really believe that?

 

Well it is tough for celebrities to win slander cases. Pujols doesn't have to win to make it a rough go for Clark, but if Clark has any actual evidence (which seems unlikely) and is willing to blow a lot of money then Pujols certainly has a lot to lose.

[Ohtaniland]

LOL you really believe that?

 

Lol @ what LT?

 

Clark says Mihlfeld made the statement. What if Mihlfeld is lying now and Clark is not. There's no way for us to know this. 

Edited October 15, 2013 by Hamiltown

[yk9001]

Add this to the list of Alcantara distractions.  Injuries.  Kids going to school in flyover country.  Steroids allegations.  Insults from the good people of St. Louis.

 

The only thing that would add more distractions is if the guy needed an accountability partner to babysit him 24/7.

[AngelsLakersFan]

Polygraphs are voluntary so if either party has nothing to hide. Why not? A polygraph on Chris Mihlfeld might be of interest.

 

A pass or fail on a polygraph does not have to equate to truth/lie. If Albert is telling the truth then there is no upside to taking such a test. If he is telling the truth then no one can ever prove he took steroids, and passing a lie detector test will not ever convince those certain he has. The introduction of the polygraph test as a means of settling the lawsuit can only serve to undermine the public's perception of Pujols, which is exactly what Clark's attorney seems set on.

[jshep]

Ya, the polygraph thing is a sideshow. Nothing more.

 

Assuming all the parties agree to it, this is how it likely goes down:

 

Anyone who comes out of it looking good makes a big deal about how they've been "vindicated" or whatever.

 

Anyone who comes out of looking not as good has a pretty sound foundation for an argument against the reliability of polygraphs already there for them.

 

Anything to come out of those polygraph tests likely gets laughed at by the judge, and we're back to square one.

 

I mean if they want to spend their time, energy, and money on polygraph tests, whatever. But it's not going to settle or decide anything, and it most certainly won't be the end of anything.

[yk9001]

The introduction of the polygraph test as a means of settling the lawsuit can only serve to undermine the public's perception of Pujols, which is exactly what Clark's attorney seems set on.

 

Albert F'd up.  NEVER threaten a lawsuit unless you are fully prepared to deal with the ramifications that follow.

 

Thanks again, Arte Claus, for this cornucopia of good tidings Pujols brings us.

[markb]

As an aside, between the article's mention of the "snarky bloggers playbook" and my reference to The Onion, I accidentally created a very relevant reference:   http://www.theonion.com/articles/internet-rocked-by-blogger-with-sarcastic-sensibil,34212/

[Troll Daddy]

Clarks's lawyer is working on some sort of contingency and getting his name publicized. He probably hoping to get Pujols to pay his fees.

 

just a guess on my part

[Lifetime]

Why do you think he's not fully prepared?

[Ohtaniland]

Why do you think he's not fully prepared?

 

No witnesses have been deposed yet. Let's see how all this plays out before we judge Clark, Pujols, Mihlfeld or their attorneys. I still think that Albert will win by default because Clark will run out of resources to defend himself. So the longer it plays out the more likely that we may never hear the entire story about this whole issue. I'm sure that MLB is watching this closely to avoid another black eye.

[Troll Daddy]

No witnesses have been deposed yet. Let's see how all this plays out before we judge Clark, Pujols, Mihlfeld or their attorneys. I still think that Albert will win by default because Clark will run out of resources to defend himself. So the longer it plays out the more likely that we may never hear the entire story about this whole issue. I'm sure that MLB is watching this closely to avoid another black eye.

 

I doubt Arte is watching.