One month after Pete Rose sued him for defamation over a statutory rape allegation, former Major League Baseball special counsel John Dowd filed for dismissal of the federal lawsuit.
The motion filed Tuesday by Dowd, who led the 1989 MLB investigation of Rose's gambling that resulted in his banishment, says the suit fails to establish that Rose suffered any financial damage from what Dowd said last year.
In a July 13, 2015, radio interview, Dowd said Rose's ex-associate, Michael Bertolini, "told us that not only did he run bets, but he ran young girls for him down in spring training, ages 12 to 14."
In his conversation with WCHE-AM of West Chester, Pennsylvania, Dowd added: "Isn't that lovely? So that's statutory rape every time you do that."
When NJ.com published Dowd's remarks three weeks later, Rose said they were "shocking" and "unbelievable," and Bertolini's attorney provided a statement saying his client "categorically denies" them.
The Rose suit, which seeks unspecified damages to be determined by a jury, says Dowd's comments were "false and malicious" and caused footwear company Skechers and pharmaceutical company Ducere Pharma to opt against renewing endorsement contracts under which Rose would have received $315,000.
One contention of Rose's suit is that Dowd knew he had a deal with Skechers that would continue, and he made his comments with the intent to prevent renewal of the contract. The Tuesday filing calls the claim "facially absurd."
Dowd's motion to dismiss says Rose's suit offers no facts or chronology on the non-renewals, does not substantiate any connection between the radio interview and the two companies' respective decisions and does not address other potential explanations such as:
• a March 2015 Cincinnati Enquirer report with allegations that Rose financed cocaine deals;
• an Outside the Lines report in June 2015 revealing a long-sought Bertolini notebook from 1986 that indicated Rose bet on baseball, including on his Cincinnati Reds, while he was still a player. Rose has always denied that, despite his 2004 admission of betting when he was just their manager in 1987-88;
• the December 2015 decision by MLB commissioner Rob Manfred rejecting Rose's petition for reinstatement.
Rose's suit says when he and Manfred met on Sept. 24, 2015, about his possible reinstatement, they discussed Dowd's accusation and Rose vehemently denied it. Tuesday's dismissal motion notes that Manfred's ruling contained no reference to the Dowd radio comments.
Manfred gave permission for Rose, 75, to participate in Cincinnati ceremonies in June when the Reds inducted him into their Hall of Fame and retired his number 14. MLB's all-time hits leader lives in Las Vegas, where he often signs memorabilia at a store adjacent to a casino. Rose, a Fox Sports analyst, is ineligible for election to the Baseball Hall of Fame, but he was in Cooperstown, New York, last month signing autographs, as he's done for many induction weekends.
A longtime criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor, Dowd, also 75, states in his motion that a Nevada defamation law should apply to the Rose suit, which was filed in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia. That law requires a plaintiff to file a written demand for retraction in order to collect anything other than proven economic damages. Dowd's filing asserts that Rose's noncompliance with his home state's mandate should negate his other claims, such as for punitive damages and for allegedly suffering "personal humiliation and mental anguish" from the Dowd interview.
Contacted Tuesday by Outside the Lines, Rose's attorney Martin Garbus said, "The motion will be denied, it's a delaying tactic."
Garbus added, "Mr. Dowd will ultimately have to testify in court. A Pennsylvania jury will find that Pete Rose was libeled."