Clemens and the 'presumption of innocence'
Date published: 3/13/2008
PROVIDENCE, R.I.-- The Roger Clemens case presents parents, coaches, and teachers with an opportunity to engage young people in stimulating discussions on issues that transcend baseball, such as why steroid use is wrong, the satisfaction of honorable competition, and understanding the concept of "presumption of innocence."
A discussion of steroid use can encompass four distinct points:
Medical evidence confirms that steroid use can cause great harm to one's body.
Many psychologists and psychiatrists are on record as saying that steroid use can cause great harm to one's self-esteem.
Innumerable examples, including Clemens and many other baseball players named in the Mitchell Report, confirm that steroid use will cause great harm to one's reputation.
Steroid use involves an unethical strike at a core principle of fair play: Players who use steroids pressure teammates and opponents to consider use, merely to keep up.
The notion of fair play is central to any discussion of steroid use. Young adults might consider a salient point proposed by ethicist Michael Josephson to anyone who heeds a conscience: Victory without honor is profoundly unsatisfying.
Surveys conducted with former athletes and coaches for "The Encyclopedia of Sports Parenting" made clear that for many who move the goalposts in pursuit of success, a "scruples strike" occurs at some point; many in this group report that the strike is powerful. "As I reflect back on the recruiting violations and my 'do anything to win' approach, I realize now--too late--that it wasn't worth it," was the way one surveyed ex-coach lamented his transgressions.
Shakespeare addressed this issue when he wrote:
A peace above all earthly dignities,
A still and quiet conscience.
The phrase "presumption of innocence," central to our system of justice, is often misunderstood. When we consider the Clemens circumstances, the concept needs to be clear. The Constitution does not require all U.S. citizens to presume the innocence of an accused criminal, or anyone suspected of breaking the law. It does, however, require a jury in a criminal case to make this presumption, until the evidence unequivocally proves otherwise. Such a presumption of innocence rightly reduces the chances of an innocent person's being wrongly convicted.
Date published: 3/13/2008
|