A federal judge in Texas on Tuesday denied a motion to disqualify Roger Clemens’ attorney Rusty Hardin from the pitcher’s defamation suit against Brian McNamee, the trainer accusing Clemens of performance-enhancing drug use.A while back I wrote that while I believed Hardin had a conflict, the only person who could raise it as an issue was Andy Pettitte. The judge agreed with this view.
McNamee’s lawyer Richard Emery had argued that Hardin’s previous representation of Yankee pitcher Andy Pettitte (who will almost certainly be a witness in the case) was a conflict of interest.
Pettitte -- who is now represented by counsel who doesn't think it's a great idea to stand by while his client is publicly disgraced -- hasn't made an effort to get Hardin off the case. My guess is that given how short a time Hardin represented Pettitte -- four days according to the article -- there isn't much in the way of deep dark secrets he needs to concern himself with anyway, so why incur the expense of litigation over it? After all, he already copped to using HGH and presumably spilled all there was to spill when he went before that congressional committee.
At any rate, for those scoring at home: (1) Clemens has issued a mea culpa; and (2) Hardin has prevailed on a potentially embarrassing motion. Seems like a good time to declare victory and call this all off, no?