by Ray Downs
A public spat between the attorneys for Albert Pujols and Jack Clark is becoming more entertaining than the feud between the former Cardinals ballplayers.
On Monday, Clark's St. Louis-based attorney, Albert Watkins, issued a statement poking fun at both Pujols and the defamation lawsuit he's filed against his client. The statement (excerpted below) teases Pujols about his name, relays a bit of advice Watkins received from his father and recommends a nice restaurant in the Dominican Republic (Watkins even provides the phone number). Oh, and it also playfully touches on the allegations that Clark defamed Pujols' reputation by accusing him of being a "juicer" during a segment on his short-lived radio show this summer.
Watkins asks Pujols' attorney, Los Angeles-based Martin D. Singer, to define the term "performance-enhancing drugs" by talking about erectile dysfunction.
Without in any way intending to belittle the importance of erectile dysfunction to those who, regularly or from time to time, suffer from the frustration associated with "taking batting practice with a rope," but Viagra is considered by a whole lot of folks to be a performance enhancing drug. For that matter, Ben Gay may be considered a performance enhancing drug. Perhaps I am speaking out of turn, but I would strongly discourage the concurrent use of both Viagra and Ben Gay. Again, I digress. That being said, kindly consider this a request that you define as a matter of court record specifically those drugs that you consider encompassed by your own use of the three words, "performance enhancing drugs."
Eventually, Watkins' letter gets to the point: challenging Pujols to a lie detector test as a way to settle the matter of whether Pujols juiced once and for all.
Yesterday Singer fired back, albeit in a less fun manner.
Continue on for more legal repartee!
"The ridiculous 'proposal' by Jack Clark's attorney is an absurd publicity ploy by a lawyer known for his hyperbole," the statement says. It continues:
This defamation lawsuit was not filed so that Jack Clark and his lawyer can try to turn a very serious legal claim into a media circus. Instead of focusing on the facts and letting a jury decide the case based on evidence, Jack Clark's lawyer is trying to use a serious legal claim to drum up publicity. We will see how the judge reacts to his stated intention of using the court to create a "public spectacle."
That prompted another statement yesterday from Watkins:
The writing style of Mr. Singer is greatly appreciated. But I have not had the time to Google the big words he used. I don't even know what "hyperbole" means. Sounds like it might be related to a Kama Sutra position developed in the late 1800's on the sub-continent. If the suggested settlement protocol constitutes an "absurd publicity ploy," how does one explain the countless boys and girls of the land who will undoubtedly sustain hurt and pain when they come to learn the ballplayer they worship(ed) is unwilling to submit to the same deception discernment device (lie detector test) as is employed on a daily basis by local, state and federal law enforcement personnel the nation over?See also: InsideSTL Apologizes To Albert Pujols For Jack Clark's PED Accusation
Watkins tells Daily RFT that although his letter to Singer was meant to be a tad bit tongue-in-cheek, he was also totally serious.
"Buried in there is some very serious subject matter," he says. "My suggestion to him is that he really takes a look at the severity of the circumstances here, was quite heartfelt."