Anyway, ” none of the applicable exceptions under the Federal Rules of Evidence appear to apply in this case” seems a remarkable assertion given that we don’t know what actual hearsay we’re talking about.

I was just talking about the one mentioned in the news story, but your point is well taken.

Additionally, arbitrarily picking the “Federal Rules of Evidence,” perhaps because you want to show everyone that you’re a lawyer,” overlooks the fact that states have their own rules of evidence

Well, I said I was a lawyer, and no I don’t like admitting it. Not a generally liked profession, as I sure you are aware of

And yes, each state has different rules. I’m not familiar with Florida rules, but lots of states do model their evidence rules after FRE (as we both know). Then again, this might turn into a federal probe, at which point, FRE is very important.

dismissing evidence as “hearsay” has limited value, especially outside a judicial context. I really doubt you disagree with that.

True, lots of hearsay in everyday life has impact on people. Still doesn’t mean the Richard Justice blog post was any good

Ok, I’m done with this debate. Adios.

Also, if you knew anything about the law, you’d know that the exceptions to the hearsay rule are many and varied.

True. But none of the applicable exceptions under the Federal Rules of Evidence appear to apply in this case.

Calling something hearsay isn’t much of a criticism; hearsay is often admissible and probative.

It’s only admissible if an applicable exception applies, or it is being admitted for a purpose other than proving the truth of the matter asserted.

Moreover, the restrictions on hearsay are limited to court proceedings.

Generally, yes.

Outside that context, labeling evidence “hearsay” is of limited value.

Perhaps. Question is whether you are an attorney as well. If you are (like me), stop being so damn hostile. The Richard Justice blog post still sucked, and Ben Franklin’s underlying point about hearsay still stands. Namely, there are no direct witnesses, meaning persons who witnessed the alleged injections, corroborating the story. Bosch denies it. So, does A-Rod. Is there enough evidence to make A-Rod appear guilty of wrongdoing…yes, but nothing definitive as of yet.

But keep hugging those BOYS, Melissa.

Nothing in the story connects A-Rod to this controversy. Maybe eventually something will come out, but now all we have is third party corroboration, or as they call it in court, hearsay.

Your point is good, but it means the opposite of what you think it means. Nothing in the story connects A-Rod to any controversy because it’s not a story about A-Rod and steroids. It’s a story about A-Rod, a player who could never seem to fit in anywhere whose legacy will be uncertain at best and likely plain-old tarnished. Yes, the story is a terrible “A-Rod and steroids” story but it’s also a terrible recipe for King Ranch chicken, and it’s a godawful owner’s manual to a 1997 F-150. Not sure why you’re criticizing it as something it’s not.

Also, if you knew anything about the law, you’d know that the exceptions to the hearsay rule are many and varied. Calling something hearsay isn’t much of a criticism; hearsay is often admissible and probative. Moreover, the restrictions on hearsay are limited to court proceedings. Outside that context, labeling evidence “hearsay” is of limited value.

I just threw up in my mouth.

Hope he rots in baseball hell.

Whatever baseball hell is, I’ll assume it includes a scantily clad Dan Shaughnessy.

This is just Richard Justice sharing an interesting story and making a few observations, based on his decades of covering baseball. Nothing wrong with that.

Nothing in the story connects A-Rod to this controversy. Maybe eventually something will come out, but now all we have is third party corroboration, or as they call it in court, hearsay.

An expert in the field is sharing insights and observations.

An expert in the field of reporting on baseball. Not arm-chair psychoanalysis. Does Richard Justice have some sort of mental health training that I am unaware of that makes him qualified to speak on the mental status of athletes?

Not every blog post endeavors to be “great journalism.”

True, just look at every post TBL makes about baseball as proof.

voiding his contract?

How could they?

A joke Parcells didn’t get in on the first ballot. Who says only baseball writers are vindictive bitches?

Also, the NFL HOF class this year is solid.