Innocent or guilty
ESPN ran a special called "Pete Rose on Trial". The jury and fans (voting online) said Rose should be admitted into the Baseball Hall of Fame. Despite the overwhelming support for Rose's cause, his entrance into Cooperstown should be denied unless he plays by the rules.

Rose admits that he bet on pro sports, but never admitted that he bet on baseball. Many have thought that Rose while playing and coaching for the Cincinnati Reds bet on Major League Baseball and even on his own team. Rightfully people have argued that this charge has never been proven (even though MLB hired John Dowd, a fomer federal prosecutor, who found evidence that Rose bet on the game). However the reason why this hasn't been conclusively proven or disproven is the crux of the matter.

On 23 Aug. 1990, Rose signed an agreement with Commissioner A. Bartlett Giamatti in which he would be permanently ineligble to play MLB baseball (and thus can't be considered a candidate for the Hall of Fame). Considering the case closed, MLB dropped the case.

If Rose wishes to be considered for the Hall of Fame and negate the agreement that he signed with baseball, the investigation into his gambling should be reopened.

If there's nothing to the charges and he is cleared of the crimes that he's been accused of, then he could be considered for the hall. However, if he is guilty, then he should walk away from baseball like he agreed to 13 years ago.

After all, the way the discussion is framed today, Rose faces no potential loss for his attempt. However, if there is the possibility of Rose's shameful past being exposed perhaps Charlie Hustle will reconsider his bid to enter Copperstown.