Darn. Now we don't get an intentional vomiting trial

12 Comments

Intentional vomiter.jpgRemember that guy in Philadelphia who intentionally thew up on the 11 year-old girl?  Yeah, that was wonderful.  Seems his legal team decided that he might not be able to win over a jury, because he pleaded guilty this morning:

A 21-year-old New Jersey man has pleaded guilty
to intentionally vomiting on a man and his 11-year-old daughter in the
stands during a Philadelphia Phillies game. Matthew Clemmens of Cherry Hill, N.J., pleaded guilty to simple assault and other charges
Tuesday.

I know it would have been a tough case and everything, but if I was representing him I would have considered taking this baby to trial. Why? Thin forensic evidence! You can’t dust for vomit!

But yeah, I suppose the DNA evidence could be a killer.

Pete Rose dismisses his defamation lawsuit against John Dowd

Getty Images
4 Comments

Last year Pete Rose field a defamation lawsuit against attorney John Dowd after Dowd gave a radio interview in which he said that Rose had sexual relations with underage girls that amounted to “statutory rape, every time.” Today Rose dismissed the suit.

In a statement issued by Rose’s lawyer and Dowd’s lawyer, the parties say they agreed “based on mutual consideration, to the dismissal with prejudice of Mr. Rose’s lawsuit against Mr. Dowd.” They say they can’t comment further.

Dowd, of course, is the man who conducted the investigation into Rose’s gambling which resulted in the Hit King being placed on baseball’s permanently ineligible list back in 1989. The two have sparred through the media sporadically over the years, with Rose disputing Dowd’s findings despite agreeing to his ban back in 1989. Rose has changed his story about his gambling many times, usually when he had an opportunity to either make money off of it, like when he wrote his autobiography, or when he sought, unsuccessfully, to be reinstated to baseball. Dowd has stood by his report ever since it was released.

In the wake of Dowd’s radio comments in 2015, a woman came forward to say that she and Rose had a sexual relationship when she was under the age of 16, seemingly confirming Dowd’s assertion and forming the basis for a strong defense of Rose’s claims (truth is a total defense to a defamation claim). They seem now, however, to have buried the hatchet. Or at least buried the litigation.

That leaves Dowd more free time to defend his latest client, President Trump. And Rose more time to do whatever it is Pete Rose does with his time.