John Dowd on Pete Rose.

[Kirkendall]

From the Houston Chronicle...

Gambling still owns Pete Rose's soul

By JOHN M. DOWD

I knew then-Baseball Commissioner Bart Giamatti for only six months. On Feb. 23 1989, he retained me as the special counsel to investigate Pete Rose's gambling activities. I last saw Bart on Aug. 24, 1989, the day he threw Pete Rose out of baseball forever for betting on games of the Cincinnati Reds from 1985 to 1987, when Pete was the Reds manager. I talked to Bart every day during those six months. He treated me like a son. He called me Saint John.

When Bart hired me, he told me there would be no secrets. He directed me to keep Rose and his lawyers apprised of the progress of my inquiry. I did. Bart told me that whatever I found, the world would see. But that would came later. First, we engaged in a very private and intense round of negotiations with Pete and his advisers, much of which has never been revealed in detail.

After a month of investigation, I had all the evidence now memorialized in my 225-page report. The evidence was overwhelming. He had violated one of baseball's most sacred rules -- rules meant to preserve the integrity of the game, rules intended to assure its fans that the competition on the field is free of taint. I shared all the facts with Rose's lawyers. Then Bart directed me to lay out the evidence directly to Rose in a deposition. Bart wanted Pete to see and hear all of the hard evidence. Bart instructed me not to confront Pete, but simply to present the evidence and get his responses to it. Pete lied and denied. It was a hard two days for Pete Rose.

Following the deposition, with the facts in hand, Bart directed me to find a resolution. I spent an entire month meeting with Pete's lawyers. Bart and I agreed on the fundamental points of such a resolution: Pete would have to reconfigure his life. He would have to stop betting. He would have to make a candid response to all of the hard evidence. He would have to explain his association with all of the characters in the betting operation. He would have to submit to, and complete, a full rehabilitation. During his rehabilitation, he would be removed from the game of baseball.

If he had agreed to these terms, and paid all taxes, interest and penalties due, he could have avoided prosecution on tax evasion. Upon successful completion of his rehabilitation, he would have been readmitted to the game of baseball and could receive all honors that come with achievement and good conduct. He would have been eligible, if chosen, for admission to the Hall of Fame.

I worked for a month with Pete's counsel. They tried but could not get Pete to admit the truth. They asked if I would meet with him alone and talk to him. They believed I could bring him around. Bart approved and I agreed to talk to Pete. But Pete's agent vetoed the meeting.

We were at complete loggerheads. Pete's criminal counsel wanted the resolution we were working on, but his agent would not budge. Bart, then-deputy commissioner Fay Vincent and I met with Pete's agent. He told us that Pete was a legend and would not admit to any of the allegations. It was a short meeting. I then asked Bill White, the president of the National League, if there were friends of Pete's -- Reds teammates -- we could call upon to help him in his obvious time of need. Bill told me that Pete had no friends in baseball.

The negotiations came to an end. The rest is history -- a very public history. I wrote the report. It was given to Bart and to Pete. Bart ordered Pete to come to a hearing. Bart asked me to turn over my files to Rose's lawyers and to make available all 110 witness for interview. I did. Pete and his counsel did not interview or take the testimony of any of the witnesses. Pete refused to appear for a hearing or present any evidence on his own behalf.

Instead, he sued the commissioner, in violation of his own baseball contract. He lost in the courts and agreed to be banned forever from the game of baseball. Nine days after the announcement, we lost Bart forever when he died of a heart attack at the age of 51. But we did not lose his high standards and his love of the game.

Pete has admitted that he bet on games while managing the Reds. But the wording of that admission -- "I'm sure that I'm supposed to act all sorry or sad or guilty now that I've accepted that I've done something wrong. But you see, I'm just not built that way" -- shows that Pete has done nothing to reconfigure his life. The terrible habit of gambling still owns his soul.

Dowd, a former Justice Department prosecutor, is a criminal defense lawyer in Washington.

[The Brew Man]

A sad state of affairs...

[redsfan2]

Not much of an epitaph is it ????

Glad to see this coming out though. Dowd was asked to do a pretty unpopular thing, and he went about it in a thorough and professional manner. He's taken a lot of shots from Rose that he's never responded to, and a lot of people are or were under the impression that Rose was the victim of witch hunt and character assasination. There were a lot of people that were happy to see Rose go down and they went out of their way to dance on his grave. I didn't like seeing it, and I despised the people that were doing it, but when anybody falls from the top there's always a line of people waiting to kick them on the way down.

[JBrooks]

Hey, Kirkendall. I just read your new story on Rose. I love your point of view on the hypocrisy. The back and forth arguments on this thing are what make it such tough topic.

One thing though, you said about Ferguson Jenkins having $500 worth of Cocaine and then how he had enough to get the whole stadium high. I don't know where you're purchasing your coke, but you're getting one hell of a deal if five hundo goes that far. You'd be lucky to get a luxury box high with that much.

[Kirkendall]

Thank you for the props.

I don't know where you're purchasing your coke, but you're getting one hell of a deal if five hundo goes that far. You'd be lucky to get a luxury box high with that much.

HAHA. Maui stuff ROCKS!

[Editors Note: BengalsZone.com does not endorse the use of illegals substances as probited by the United States Government]

BTW - It was Toronto in 1980! How many people do you think were there? LOL

[redsfan2]

Good article on Rose.

Haven't seen you mention the talk he had with the journalism class in 2000. Was that unbelieveable or what ???? Also can't believe that not one of them ever said anything aboout it.

PS

If you're looking for guesses on crowd size in Toronto, mine is 15. Not 1500 or 15000, just 15.

[Kirkendall]

Haven't seen you mention the talk he had with the journalism class in 2000. Was that unbelieveable or what ???? Also can't believe that not one of them ever said anything aboout it.

I was going to but I think it would have, one; distracted the argument and two; contradict it.

I have been very both sided on the Pete Rose argument as some of you may have seen. On one hand, he broke the biggest rule in baseball, lied about it and contrition was all but absent on his admission. On the other hand, he's Peter Edward "freakin'" Rose. He gambled. He didn't take drugs and was suspended from baseball 8 times (i.e. Steve Howe), he didn't rape someone (i.e. Kobe Bryant). I'm well in the understanding that gambling hurts the game but its been a rule since at least since 1900 and the implications of someone gambling is huge. Even more so, Rose was banned for life; do you think that anyone will gamble when MLB suspended its most popular player? Then again, no former baseball player is more popular than Rose. His failure at apologizing authentically on the heals of a book coming out, right before the Hall of Fame announcement, really pushed veterans (Roses BEST ALLIES) against him. He not only failed the public and Cincinnati -- my reasons were stated in other forum topics as well as my blog -- but he failed the baseball community -- i.e. players and HOF members.

Did you know that -- I researched the issue of crimes for an earlier article for another site -- 21% of ALL NFL players have been convicted of serious crimes? I understand that most get blamed just because of their status, but 1 out of 5? There is definitely a trend there. I will see if I can dig it up on my computer (I have nearly 2000 documents from political blogs, conservative sites, MLB Blogs, other football blogs and this site), so finding something on this thing isn't easy.

The back and forth arguments on this thing are what make it such tough topic.

That is so unbelievably true. Rose has created such a stir in the sports world that since 1989, everyone is STILL talking about it. Unbelievable.

If you're looking for guesses on crowd size in Toronto, mine is 15. Not 1500 or 15000, just 15.

I think $500 of average coke could get the stadium high. But I don't know, I restrict myself to beer and woman; that's addicting enough.

[BengalszoneBilly]

I don't think anything written here is going to change anyones mind on how they feel on this topic.

I personally could give a rats ass he bet on baseball. He never bet the Reds to lose, and growing up idolizing him, and with the sheer love of the game he displayed puts him in the HOF in my book. If you weren't there...then you just don't know.

As far as him saying "he just ain't built that way," well that IS the truth. He personified the "no regrets" style of play, and obviously in his life too. I don't have a problem with it, and I think he'll still be inducted, and I'm happy about it!

It beats all these "Stars Of The Steriod Era" who will be inducted after him! Nobody seems to be getting their panties wadded up in a knot over that one. The game has no integrity, and hasn't for years. Who are you kidding but yourself?

[Kirkendall]

I don't think anything written here is going to change anyones mind on how they feel on this topic.

I personally could give a rats ass he bet on baseball. He never bet the Reds to lose, and growing up idolizing him, and with the sheer love of the game he displayed puts him in the HOF in my book. If you weren't there...then you just don't know.

As far as him saying "he just ain't built that way," well that IS the truth. He personified the "no regrets" style of play, and obviously in his life too. I don't have a problem with it, and I think he'll still be inducted, and I'm happy about it!

It beats all these "Stars Of The Steriod Era" who will be inducted after him! Nobody seems to be getting their panties wadded up in a knot over that one. The game has no integrity, and hasn't for years. Who are you kidding but yourself?

These same actions are way professional boxing as a whole is tainted. No one ever knows if someone wins out right with that wonder in their mind if they REALLY WON it.

This is rather simple. I've never accepted putting him in the HOF, rather punish those who do worse to society so that point is mute. His work ethic means nothing and a 13 year ban proves that. You should be mad at Rose for his failure to follow through as a proud and honest baseball player while lying to you for all of those years. You should be made at Rose for failing to meet the biggest Baseball rule that CLEARLY states a lifetime ban if you gamble. While Rose is playing the sympathy game right now with all of the lifetime Rose supporters, he's forcing all of his cincy residents today and tomorrow to buy his book just so those same fans can get an autograph. Sorry, he's not worthy of popular support and the majority of the media (the VOTERS!) prove this. As well as the veterans on the hall.

[BengalszoneBilly]

Josh,

In as much as I love Pete, I AM pissed off at him! I will NOT buy his book or read it either for that matter. I wish all my knowledge of him could have ceased at the end of his playing days. I have his autographed baseball card from then. I wouldn't let him autograph my next handfull of toilet paper at this point in this story!!

It's just sad. It didn't have to end on this sour note, HOF or not. As an old boss of mine once said, "one oh s**t wipes out a hundred atta boys!"

[Kirkendall]

BTW, anyone notice that Bush in his state of the union address is advocating allowing former convicts the ability to get good jobs? Well if Bush and society can forgive convicts why can't Selig and baseball forgive Rose? Just a wondering though.

[BengalszoneBilly]

BTW, anyone notice that Bush in his state of the union address is advocating allowing former convicts the ability to get good jobs? Well if Bush and society can forgive convicts why can't Selig and baseball forgive Rose? Just a wondering though.

Bush said that!?! About convicts!?! Holy crap! Somebody musta slipped him some "Democrat Ectasy" as a mickey before his State of the Union address! I'll have to re-read the transcripts to weed this out for myself. Thanks for the info Josh!!

[Kirkendall]

Here's a quote from the White House...

"The President is fully committed to empowering more of America's faith- and community-based charities to address some of our toughest social problems and help those most in need. He proposes to codify the executive order he signed that ends Federal discrimination against these groups. And he announced a new plan to bring local and faith-based groups together with Federal agencies to help recently released prisoners make a successful transition back to society - reducing the chance that they will be arrested again. This 4-year, $300 million initiative will provide transitional housing, basic job training, and mentoring."

[BengalszoneBilly]

And here's a quote from a page that studies human trait's such as lying...

"Morally we as a society really do not tolerate liars. Once someone lies, they have broken our trust and even one lie may make it impossible for us to them trust again. We are on the look out for public figures lying to us... whether its by fabrication of by omission and we tend to hold public figures to a higher standard then ourselves and our friends etc.

Interestingly, however, we are more tolerant of some public figures being deceptive and not of others. We expect less honesty from politicians and more from scientists and sports figures. We have a fantasy of more purity from our athletes and researchers who are searching for truth. We imagine that politicians will at least omit truths about themselves in order to get elected and we are more likely to tolerate their lies, as long as they are not about their political work.

When you get away with a lie it often compels you to keep lying. Sooner or later the liar will stumble and be caught. Because the issue of trust is on the line (and that has the longest lasting and most hurtful potential) coming clean with the lie ASAP is usually the best tactic. Since everyone lies sometimes... the injured party is often best able to respond to the liar apologizing and "coming clean". If confronted on the lie, they continue to lie this only compounds the extreme of deception and the crime. If confession only occurs once absolutely forced to, all trust has been lost and any repair is far less likely."

I believe understanding Pete AND ourselves is the key to this dilemma.

[redsfan2]

And here's a quote from a page that studies human trait's such as lying...

"Morally we as a society really do not tolerate liars. Once someone lies, they have broken our trust and even one lie may make it impossible for us to them trust again. We are on the look out for public figures lying to us... whether its by fabrication of by omission and we tend to hold public figures to a higher standard then ourselves and our friends etc.

Interestingly, however, we are more tolerant of some public figures being deceptive and not of others. We expect less honesty from politicians and more from scientists and sports figures. We have a fantasy of more purity from our athletes and researchers who are searching for truth. We imagine that politicians will at least omit truths about themselves in order to get elected and we are more likely to tolerate their lies, as long as they are not about their political work.

When you get away with a lie it often compels you to keep lying. Sooner or later the liar will stumble and be caught. Because the issue of trust is on the line (and that has the longest lasting and most hurtful potential) coming clean with the lie ASAP is usually the best tactic. Since everyone lies sometimes... the injured party is often best able to respond to the liar apologizing and "coming clean". If confronted on the lie, they continue to lie this only compounds the extreme of deception and the crime. If confession only occurs once absolutely forced to, all trust has been lost and any repair is far less likely."

I believe understanding Pete AND ourselves is the key to this dilemma.

I've read similar articles in other publications. It really does get you to thinking about what that says about us as a culture. If you do the same study in Japan ..... China ....... or Britain, you get completely different results.

I have a very low tolerance for lying. With me it's not really so much of a moral issue as it is a practical one. An example of what I'm talking about would be if I needed information to do my job, and was lied to then I would very likely not do what was expected or fail completely. I get left holding the bag and the liar walks away whistling. Aftermath is how do you let it be known that things went south because you were given bad info or lied to without sounding like a whiner making up excuses. No matter what the circumstances, I'd rather have the truth. If its tough or bad news, then at least I know what I'm dealing with. I can get pissed get over it and go about my business.

In keeping with your article about lying, I read one that proposed that how we deal with each other and what decisions we make in what we will or won't do in any given set of circumstances depends soley on the notion that we will be recognized at a later time. In other words if you were guarenteed that you wouldn't be recognized then you may react differently than you normally do. Hell of a notion isn't it ?? Kind of made me think of that Invisible Man movie. All the crap he pulled because he KNEW that no one would ever find out it was him. They chalked it up to chemical induced psychosis in the movie, but the study would contradict that and say that is the way any of us would act if we knew we weren't going to be recognized and held accountable. Think about that next time you bump someone and they say " Oh that's OK" . What would the really do other wise ?????? Freaky ain't it ??

[Kirkendall]

Good stuff RedsFan.

My point. I really don't care if he lied; I've lived in Cincy most of my life, but not a major Rose fan. He lied to those that supported him the most (not including me) and that should enrage the major supporters. Personally, if I was a Rose fan, I'd fell betrayed, embarrassed and harder justifying why Rose should have anything to do with Baseball..

Comes to this: Is it a moral issue or justice issue?

[redsfan2]

Good stuff RedsFan.

My point. I really don't care if he lied; I've lived in Cincy most of my life, but not a major Rose fan. He lied to those that supported him the most (not including me) and that should enrage the major supporters. Personally, if I was a Rose fan, I'd fell betrayed, embarrassed and harder justifying why Rose should have anything to do with Baseball..

Comes to this: Is it a moral issue or justice issue?

Thanks Kirk !

My feelings towards Rose are really ........... paradoxical ????? Closest word I could come up with, maybe not the most appropriate. I've said before that I absolutely loved him as a player. Personally, I thought he was kind of a *****.

I have a ton of autographed memorabilia from Bench, Perez, Concepcion, Robinson Casey .... Dunn, Larkin ...... and on and on. I'm sure you get the idea. Other than 1 baseball, I don't have anything else fom Rose. So yeah .... I guess I'm a fan, but I'm not the usual fan of Rose. For the most part, they are avid fans and very strong in their support for getting him into the hall. Rose is mentioned in all the books I have on baseball, his artifacts are in the museum, he's written a couple of books ..... (now if they could only decide if they're fiction or not. ), it's only a matter of time till somebody does a movie about him, so I guess I'm satisfied that he won't be forgotten in terms of baseball history and that's enough for me.

The hall isn't an issue for me personally because he accepted a lifetime ban, and he knew what that implied when he did it. Now it's true that he did it with the stipulation that he could apply for re instatement after a year, but that doesn't automatically mean it will be accepted. With his ego, I don't think that part ever occurred to him. He's Pete Rose ! Who's going to say no to him ???? His actions since admitting that he bet on games ...... including Reds games but never to lose seem to bear out my opinion. Instead of being contrite ..... " that's just not how I'm built ", he's acting like its a dam conspiracy to continue to keep him out. In a way its a replay of the first go around ...... once again he's being his own worst enemy.

Everybody seems to forget about re instatement, No one argues that, they go straight to the hall. The second is not possible til you accomplish the first and so far he's killing himself and wasting a lot of fan support by being arrogant and a contentious pain in the ass. He can't even do a book signing in the city that names streets after him without causing a ruckus. I think that is what really pisses me off about him. He's got an entire city that loves him and has supported him through thick and mostly thin, and some of the most passionate fans I've seen, and he doesn't seem to give a dam about any of them. In my opionion, it's one of the worst cases of unrequited love that I've ever seen.

But that's just me.