The Day After … the Mitchell Report

NEW YORK -- George Mitchell insisted naming names was the right decision and said he was prepared for Roger Clemens and others to deny they used performance-enhancing drugs.

"We made every effort to establish the truthfulness of the information that we received," baseball's steroids investigator said Friday during a half-hour interview at his law office. "Several of the witnesses were interviewed in the presence of federal law enforcement agents who informed the witnesses that if they made false statements they would subject themselves to possible criminal jeopardy. So there was very strong incentives to tell the truth."

A day after Mitchell issued a searing report that implicated Clemens, seven former MVPs and more than 80 players in all, President Bush said he's been "troubled by the steroid allegations."

Mitchell said he included in his report nearly all those who were implicated in his investigation. Players largely declined to interview with Mitchell.

Full Coverage The Mitchell Report The complete PDF document Stories Editorial: Scandal puts a blemish on baseball [12/13/07] Rozner: Dough! Mitchell wiffed [12/13/07] Cox: Rush to judgment created media mess [12/13/07] Former player: 'Those guys were taking my job' [12/13/07] No current Cubs, Sox players in report [12/13/07] Ex-Sox Parque denies he bought steroids [12/13/07] Clubhouse attendant now lives quiet life [12/13/07] Details of key players named in report [12/13/07] Report: Bonds warned of drug tests [12/13/07] Punishment coming? It's tough to say [12/13/07] Types of drugs named in report [12/13/07] Mitchell Report names names [12/13/07] Was the Mitchell Report baseball's darkest hour? [12/13/07] Congress wants new steroids hearing [12/13/07] Video MLB Union: Report Shouldn't Have Included Names Selig: Report is 'a call to action' Mitchell: 'Wide-spread' Steroid Use in Baseball Baseball fans react to Mitchell Report Sound off What's your take on the Mitchell Report? Did it go far enough? Should baseball have spent the time and money on it? Who on the list surprised you? Let us know at sportstalk@dailyherald.com.

"There were two players whose names I did not publish because the allegations occurred after the time that they had left baseball," he said.

The 74-year-old former Senate majority leader, hired by Commissioner Bud Selig in March 2006, wouldn't put a precise figure on how many major-leaguers used performance-enhancing drugs.

"It is my judgment that the 5-7 percent that tested positive in the 2003 anonymous survey testing understated the amount of use, but I don't think it reaches a majority. I think it is a minority, albeit a significant minority," he said.

"That's why I think that the majority of players who don't use such substances are principal victims of what has occurred. They follow the rules. They obey the law and they are placed in a position where they have to make the awful choice between either becoming illegal users themselves or being put at a competitive disadvantage."

Although he received cooperation from the Justice Department, Mitchell said he did not obtain evidence from the Albany, N.Y., district attorney, who has been investigating a drug ring that sold to players. He also said he never got complete copies of sworn statements by IRS special agent Jeff Novitzky that implicated players but were released publicly with the names blacked out.

Because it was a private inquiry, Mitchell said he did not think a standard of evidence was necessary.

"It is not a judicial proceeding. It is not a trial," he said. "But it doesn't make any difference what standard or what court you're in: direct, personal, eyewitness testimony, it is the principal form of evidence in most proceedings."

Much of his evidence came from former Mets clubhouse attendant Kirk Radomski and former Yankees strength coach Brian McNamee, who said he personally saw use by Clemens and Andy Pettitte.

Clemens' lawyer vehemently denied the accusations against the seven-time Cy Young Award winner, whose Hall of Fame chances might have been damaged by Mitchell's report. Pettitte's agent, Randy Hendricks, has advised his client not to comment because he is an active player.

Although Radomski didn't see players inject drugs, his records and story were compelling to Mitchell.

"If someone makes one purchase and says he didn't use it, that's one thing," Mitchell said. "If someone makes three, four, five, six, seven purchases over a period of several months or years, it obviously raises the question: If you weren't using it, why were you continuing to buy it?"

Sitting in a conference room, a plant behind his chair to add a scenic background, Mitchell said his next big task would be to start treatment for prostate cancer, an illness he made public in August. He said he was told his prognosis is good.

Although he thinks drug testing is essential in baseball, he didn't agree that congressional representatives, judges and the president and vice president should set an example by also submitting to tests.

"I don't think one can make a blanket statement that all people should be tested," he said. "It obviously requires a case-by-case analysis."

Mitchell is a director of the Boston Red Sox, and some criticized him during the probe for having a conflict of interest. When the report was issued Thursday and singled out present and former Yankees stars such as Pettitte, Clemens and Chuck Knoblauch, Mitchell's role with the Red Sox came under renewed focus.

No major Red Sox were cited.

However, Mitchell did include e-mails from Boston officials speculating over which players were on steroids among those the team contemplated acquiring.

"We received no such documents from the Yankees," he said. "Now surely no one would argue that I was biased in favor of the Yankees because I published this about the Red Sox."

Mitchell said baseball's problem seems to have shifted from steroids to human growth hormone, for which there is no reliable test. He predicted a different substance will replace HGH as the drug of choice.

"At this precise moment, somewhere in the world, in China, in Mexico, or somewhere in the United States, someone is working to develop another drug that avoids detection, that accomplishes the purpose or at least is claimed to accomplish the purpose," he said.