Bonds Indicted

[Channing]

On perjury and obstructing justice. When the Vick case was in full swing there were stats that the feds win something like 95% of their cases. Not to good for Barry. Apparently the punishment for this type of offense is "years not months" (as per Roger Cossack)

[billybreen]

You beat me to it.

[DevilAlumna]

Links (http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=barry+bonds)

Reminder, this is only an indictment.

<sniff>Why do I smell ham sandwiches?</sniff> ;)

[wilson]

I gotta say, I'm pretty surprised that this actually happened. I don't like Barry and I rue the day he broke two of baseball's most hallowed records, but I think this is the strongest exhibit yet that his defenders aren't too far from the truth when they decry the whole BALCO/steroids saga as a "witch hunt."

[billybreen]

Links (http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=barry+bonds)

Reminder, this is only an indictment.

<sniff>Why do I smell ham sandwiches?</sniff> ;)

Google News? Oh DA, I expect something more like this (http://search.live.com/news/results.aspx?q=bonds+indicted&go=Search+News&mkt=en-us&scope=&FORM=LIVSOP) from you :)

[Channing]

I gotta say, I'm pretty surprised that this actually happened. I don't like Barry and I rue the day he broke two of baseball's most hallowed records, but I think this is the strongest exhibit yet that his defenders aren't too far from the truth when they decry the whole BALCO/steroids saga as a "witch hunt."

I dont know . . . perjuring yourself to the feds is a big deal . . . they dont take that sort of thing lightly.

[wilson]

I dont know . . . perjuring yourself to the feds is a big deal . . . they dont take that sort of thing lightly.

I understand that, and I'm not at all saying they should. But if Barry were just some schmo taking steroids at the local Gold's Gym, would this have come about? I hardly think so.

[EarlJam]

If he were to go to prison, would there be any chance (not saying I want that) that a chunk of his home runs, and hence the record would be taken from him?

Is that even possible?

-EarlJam

[Channing]

I understand that, and I'm not at all saying they should. But if Barry were just some schmo taking steroids at the local Gold's Gym, would this have come about? I hardly think so.

I honestly do believe it would happen to Joe Schmoe. Now, it wouldnt be breaking news on ESPN, but if Joe Schmoe lied to a federal grand jury I honestly beleive they would go after him.

Also, drawing an analogy to my personal area . . . the IRS makes no bones about the fact that they make an effort to make an example out of high profile people that run afoul of the tax laws. I am sure there is some of that sentiment going on here as well.

[wilson]

Also, drawing an analogy to my personal area . . . the IRS makes no bones about the fact that they make an effort to make an example out of high profile people that run afoul of the tax laws. I am sure there is some of that sentiment going on here as well.

Fair enough...also, I must say that I have basically zero expertise in these matters. But I still think that this has been carried much further than it would have been for almost anyone else (even another baseball player) given Barry's popularity.
To reiterate, I'm not exactly shedding a tear for Barry right now, but I also don't think this really represents an even-handed application of justice.
It will be fascinating to see what MLB does with this, especially with the release of the Mitchell Report looming.

[JMorgan99]

Fair enough...also, I must say that I have basically zero expertise in these matters. But I still think that this has been carried much further than it would have been for almost anyone else (even another baseball player) given Barry's popularity.
To reiterate, I'm not exactly shedding a tear for Barry right now, but I also don't think this really represents an even-handed application of justice.
It will be fascinating to see what MLB does with this, especially with the release of the Mitchell Report looming.

The government has relatively limited resources when it comes to combatting steroid use. By going after Bonds, the most high-profile person ever accused of using the drugs, and potentially winning a case against him, they are able to scare many potential steroid users away from ever using the drug as well as getting some people to stop using the drug. To what effect this occurs, I do not know, but I can assure you a much higher number of people are scared if it is on headline news of ESPN (ie - Bonds indicted) than on the back page of the local paper (ie - Joe Schmoe indicted). Does that suck for Barry? Yes. But if he broke the rules, as long as the court doesn't apply a more strict punishment than is prescribed in the law books, then he's fair game. Kinda like Paris Hilton with the DUI. But she had it coming :)

[DevilAlumna]

Poor Joe Schmoe (http://www.joeschmoe.com). He gets so abused. And since I know the guy (really, I do), I can guarantee he's never lied to a federal grand jury. Nor does he juice. But he does play a mean mellophone.

Oh, and BB, news.google.com has a much better homepage experience. We are actually allowed to use other products. ;)

[YmoBeThere]

IIRC, they went hard after Martha Stewart and ultimately nailed her on conspiracy, obstruction, and making false statements. Hardly the insider trading they probably wanted to get her for.

Similarly for Bonds, they can't get him for what they would really like to get him for, but they should be able to get a conviction on what they have brought.

[dkbaseball]

I'm assuming both charges are based on his statement that he didn't use steroids. If so, it's about as blameworthy, from a common sense standpoint, as Bill Clinton saying he didn't have sex, and about as deserving of prison time. I'm with Wilson -- smells like a publicity-seeking witch hunt.

To the point that the feds can get more bang for their buck by making an example of a big fish -- that would violate one of the fundamental precepts of criminal justice. It's supposed to be parceled out even-handedly, whatever the status of the defendant. Having thus sermonized, I probably should point out that I said the same thing about Michael Vick.

[greybeard]

I'm assuming both charges are based on his statement that he didn't use steroids. If so, it's about as blameworthy, from a common sense standpoint, as Bill Clinton saying he didn't have sex, and about as deserving of prison time. I'm with Wilson -- smells like a publicity-seeking witch hunt.

To the point that the feds can get more bang for their buck by making an example of a big fish -- that would violate one of the fundamental precepts of criminal justice. It's supposed to be parceled out even-handedly, whatever the status of the defendant. Having thus sermonized, I probably should point out that I said the same thing about Michael Vick.

Well said. Looking at the Vick model, how come they are no conspiracy charges against the guys who were paying BB the money that they knew he used to buy drugs so he could hit home runs and make them even more money. I see this thing going all the way up to Bud himself. How come the Buck stops with Barry? Is it any less certain that the guys who ran the Giants during Barry's run that he was using enhancers that they were paying for than it was that Vick knew that the money he was giving his buddies were being used on dog fighting?

If this were a real federal prosecution they would get Barry to roll on his bosses, or go after them as the bigger fish in this steroid game. Certainly managers and owners who knew what was going on had far greater culpability as far as creating an atmosphere of not only permissiveness towards steroids use, but outright encouragement, in the game.

Nope this is not a normal get the biggies so the littles will be scared. This is cherry picking headlines in connection with the real profiteers to obfiscate who the real responsible parties are. That would be you Bud, for starters.

[snowdenscold]

But he does play a mean mellophone.


Yeah mellophone! O ye great trumpet on steroids... (oops, did I say steroids?)

[YmoBeThere]

If this were a real federal prosecution they would get Barry to roll on his bosses,

Can't do more if everyone is lying or won't say anything. This was likely the best they could do. Unfortunately, they didn't do this before the season began.

[Channing]

Well said. Looking at the Vick model, how come they are no conspiracy charges against the guys who were paying BB the money that they knew he used to buy drugs so he could hit home runs and make them even more money. I see this thing going all the way up to Bud himself. How come the Buck stops with Barry? Is it any less certain that the guys who ran the Giants during Barry's run that he was using enhancers that they were paying for than it was that Vick knew that the money he was giving his buddies were being used on dog fighting?


If this were a real federal prosecution they would get Barry to roll on his bosses, or go after them as the bigger fish in this steroid game. Certainly managers and owners who knew what was going on had far greater culpability as far as creating an atmosphere of not only permissiveness towards steroids use, but outright encouragement, in the game.

Nope this is not a normal get the biggies so the littles will be scared. This is cherry picking headlines in connection with the real profiteers to obfiscate who the real responsible parties are. That would be you Bud, for starters.

(1) They already got the bigger fish in the steroid game - that would be Victor Conte.

(2) I hope you are not serious about imposing criminal liability on managers and owners. They may be, and imo, certainly are, morally culpable. But you need this little thing known as an action to commit a crime. Now, if the managers were providing the steroids, that a whole different story.

(3) The definition of a criminal conspiracy is: an agreement with another to to break the law at some point in the future. Michael Vick was charged with dogfighting. That was clearly a criminal act and they had evidence that he and his cohorts had made plans to sponsor dog fights in the future. Barry Bonds was charged with perjury and obstruction of justice. I am not sure what the foundation of the obstruction charge is, but it would be very difficult to prove he made an agreement with another person to lie to the feds again in the future. They are not going after him drug usage. The charge I was more surprised to see missing was some sort of tax related charge.

(4) Unless I missed sarcasm in your post, it sounds to me like you are actually incredulous that Bonds has been indicted for this. I can't understand how. Unless the charges are totally baseless (and there is no evidence to support them), its the justice system at work. These are the same charges that would come against your or I if we lied to a federal grand jury

[cspan37421]

Evil is that which one believes of others. It is a sin to believe evil of others, but seldom a mistake. -- Henry Louis Mencken

If he gets convicted, there ought to be a National Schadenfreude Day.

[knights68]

Forget OJ, meet the century's new "Juice Man"!

[greybeard]

(1) They already got the bigger fish in the steroid game - that would be Victor Conte.

(2) I hope you are not serious about imposing criminal liability on managers and owners. They may be, and imo, certainly are, morally culpable. But you need this little thing known as an action to commit a crime. Now, if the managers were providing the steroids, that a whole different story.

(3) The definition of a criminal conspiracy is: an agreement with another to to break the law at some point in the future. Michael Vick was charged with dogfighting. That was clearly a criminal act and they had evidence that he and his cohorts had made plans to sponsor dog fights in the future. Barry Bonds was charged with perjury and obstruction of justice. I am not sure what the foundation of the obstruction charge is, but it would be very difficult to prove he made an agreement with another person to lie to the feds again in the future. They are not going after him drug usage. The charge I was more surprised to see missing was some sort of tax related charge.

(4) Unless I missed sarcasm in your post, it sounds to me like you are actually incredulous that Bonds has been indicted for this. I can't understand how. Unless the charges are totally baseless (and there is no evidence to support them), its the justice system at work. These are the same charges that would come against your or I if we lied to a federal grand jury

Wasn't serious. Nor do I think that this witch hunt against Barry is. I do think the real culprits in the baseball and steroids issue, which I think is a misuse of the term to begin with, are Bud and the other owners. Absolutely.

I see steroid use by at least some of the bigs including Bonds having its roots, not in record chasing, but in health issues and a desire to keep playing. Having a broken body myself and having had to give up things I love, basketball was everything to me even though I stunk, I can understand stellar performers with back (McGuire) and knee (Bonds) issues that stand poised to end careers opting to controlled use of steroids to keep going. Frankly, if it is controlled to minimize health risks, I'm all for it.

Life is too short and a person should be free to treat his body in a reasonable manner to be able to keep on using it. I don't think Bud, Congress, or anyone else should be telling a player and his doctor what the player can or can not do. I really, really don't.

As for the integrity of the game, come on, who's kidding whom. These owners have known about steroid use and made huge profits off it for years. If the Feds didn't, they are idiots! Congress has bigger issues to worry about and those hearings were a farse. If Congress wants to hold hearings on something related to sports they should address the scandal of injuries. Not so that they can legislate, but rather so they can educate. Educate themselves and the kids. After all, like my friend T always used to say, "We do it for the kids." He was always just spoofing; making fun of phonies like the guys that indicted Bonds and someone like Bud who threw his boy under the bus, "after he took from him everything he could use." Bob Zimmerman, Like a Rolling Stone.

[Channing]

Wasn't serious. Nor do I think that this witch hunt against Barry is. I do think the real culprits in the baseball and steroids issue, which I think is a misuse of the term to begin with, are Bud and the other owners. Absolutely.

I see steroid use by at least some of the bigs including Bonds having its roots, not in record chasing, but in health issues and a desire to keep playing. Having a broken body myself and having had to give up things I love, basketball was everything to me even though I stunk, I can understand stellar performers with back (McGuire) and knee (Bonds) issues that stand poised to end careers opting to controlled use of steroids to keep going. Frankly, if it is controlled to minimize health risks, I'm all for it.

Life is too short and a person should be free to treat his body in a reasonable manner to be able to keep on using it. I don't think Bud, Congress, or anyone else should be telling a player and his doctor what the player can or can not do. I really, really don't.

As for the integrity of the game, come on, who's kidding whom. These owners have known about steroid use and made huge profits off it for years. If the Feds didn't, they are idiots! Congress has bigger issues to worry about and those hearings were a farse. If Congress wants to hold hearings on something related to sports they should address the scandal of injuries. Not so that they can legislate, but rather so they can educate. Educate themselves and the kids. After all, like my friend T always used to say, "We do it for the kids." He was always just spoofing; making fun of phonies like the guys that indicted Bonds and someone like Bud who threw his boy under the bus, "after he took from him everything he could use." Bob Zimmerman, Like a Rolling Stone.


I think I'm with you. I wont say the owners and MLB are more culpable than the players that used the steroids, but I am willing to go 50/50 on the moral culpability. However, it wasn't the owners who lied to a federal grand jury under oath.

[EarlJam]

Wasn't serious. Nor do I think that this witch hunt against Barry is. I do think the real culprits in the baseball and steroids issue, which I think is a misuse of the term to begin with, are Bud and the other owners. Absolutely.

I see steroid use by at least some of the bigs including Bonds having its roots, not in record chasing, but in health issues and a desire to keep playing. Having a broken body myself and having had to give up things I love, basketball was everything to me even though I stunk, I can understand stellar performers with back (McGuire) and knee (Bonds) issues that stand poised to end careers opting to controlled use of steroids to keep going. Frankly, if it is controlled to minimize health risks, I'm all for it.

Life is too short and a person should be free to treat his body in a reasonable manner to be able to keep on using it. I don't think Bud, Congress, or anyone else should be telling a player and his doctor what the player can or can not do. I really, really don't.

As for the integrity of the game, come on, who's kidding whom. These owners have known about steroid use and made huge profits off it for years. If the Feds didn't, they are idiots! Congress has bigger issues to worry about and those hearings were a farse. If Congress wants to hold hearings on something related to sports they should address the scandal of injuries. Not so that they can legislate, but rather so they can educate. Educate themselves and the kids. After all, like my friend T always used to say, "We do it for the kids." He was always just spoofing; making fun of phonies like the guys that indicted Bonds and someone like Bud who threw his boy under the bus, "after he took from him everything he could use." Bob Zimmerman, Like a Rolling Stone.

From all I've heard or read about Barry Bonds - and that's my ONLY source - I don't necessarily care for the guy. And I'd applaud his "home run king" title being taken from him based on steroid use, but this? I think it's over the top (granted I haven't read all the facts, accusations).

But to my knowledge, Bonds hasn't hurt anyone. He's a freakin' baseball player...and a father. And when it comes to being corrupt or dishonest, I'd trust Bonds over the Federal Government any day.

It scares the fing-fong out of me whenever I see the Feds jumping in on a case like this. Like they can just single anyone out they want to in order to "set an example." I know. Maybe he did commit perjury, obstruction of justice but come on. In this whole steroids debacle, if the playing field were level, you'd be indicting a hell of lot more people than just Barry Bonds.

Let baseball take care of Bonds. This just smells of rotten federal fish.

-EarlJam

P.S. If anyone with federal government connections is reading this board, please know that EarlJam loves his country and respects his government. Nothing personal at all (i.e., please don't kill me).

[allenmurray]

I don't think Bud, Congress, or anyone else should be telling a player and his doctor what the player can or can not do. I really, really don't.


Had these steroids been prescribed by a doctor, for legitimatte medical use, Barry wouldn't be in this situation. That is where your argument fails.

[throatybeard]

Poor Joe Schmoe (http://www.joeschmoe.com). He gets so abused.

Not as much as Joe Mama.

[rthomas]

I think Barry Bonds could make a nice playmate for OJ.
************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** **************************************

[Jeffrey]

When the Vick case was in full swing there were stats that the feds win something like 95% of their cases.

Hi,

I find the 95% winning percentage shocking! Could you please provide links to those stats. I recall many blunders and would have guessed (I have no facts to support my view, thus the request for some) that their success rate is much lower than 95%.

Thanks,
Jeffrey

[EarlJam]

I think Barry Bonds could make a nice playmate for OJ.
************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** **************************************

A shooter and a slasher;
A basher and a dasher;
But in the cell together;
Who will call the other Master?

[wilson]

A pretty bleak assessment of Barry's situation from Gene Wojciechowski, an ESPN guy whose work I generally enjoy and respect:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=3113075&sportCat=mlb

[allenmurray]

Hi,

I find the 95% winning percentage shocking! Could you please provide links to those stats. I recall many blunders and would have guessed (I have no facts to support my view, thus the request for some) that their success rate is much lower than 95%.

Thanks,
Jeffrey

I don't know where the stat comes from, but Wilbon uses it in his column today in the Washington Post as well. However, a 95% success rate doesn't necessarily mean they are really good. It could just mean they are really conservative regarding which cases they allow to go forward - though neither explanation bodes well for BB.

[Jeffrey]

I don't know where the stat comes from, but Wilbon uses it in his column today in the Washington Post as well. However, a 95% success rate doesn't necessarily mean they are really good. It could just mean they are really conservative regarding which cases they allow to go forward - though neither explanation bodes well for BB.

Hi,

VERY GOOD point! IMO, as with most government statistics, it could be manipulated to read what they want it to read!

Here's a classic example. My local school district claims that their drop-out rate is under 3%. So, I have asked the Board of Trustees and Superintendent to please explain why their 3 High Schools have Freshman classes between 750-900 students and their Senior classes have between 400-450 students. The short (and danced around) answer is they figure out a way to not count almost 300 students, at each High School, who would have increased the actual/true drop-out rate to over 40%!

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[wilson]

I don't know where the stat comes from, but Wilbon uses it in his column today in the Washington Post as well. However, a 95% success rate doesn't necessarily mean they are really good. It could just mean they are really conservative regarding which cases they allow to go forward - though neither explanation bodes well for BB.

I found Wilbon's following statement quite interesting:
"Yes, these are allegations, but not from some small-time prosecutor trying to win reelection."
Nifong, anyone?

[greybeard]

Had these steroids been prescribed by a doctor, for legitimatte medical use, Barry wouldn't be in this situation. That is where your argument fails.

Then they'd have just indicted the doctor along with Bonds.

BTW, doctors prescribe all sorts of legal drugs that are doing untold damage as we speak. Everyone knows of the "risks" to taking statins, er, great potential for heart failure, yet the dudes who make and pedal these drugs advertise on television. Oh, these ads, some of them at least, recite a litany of possible side effects that could fell an elephant, I'm not sure the ones for lipatur even do that, but the very purpose of the ads, and their effect, is to get john q public to search out docs who will proscribe them, if their own doctors won't. Or am I missing something.

True story. Some doctor, I forget his name but he wrote a book I believe, made a discovery. Testosterone, properly managed, can safely control, if not eliminate, diabetes. Yeap, that is what he in his extensive practice discovered. Lots of anechdotal evidence to support it. The AMA ruined the poor son of a gun. Or it might have been prosecutors at the AMA's and the drug industry's proddings. Meanwhile, diabetics, especially type IIs, get set up with drugs, including some very dangerous ones that, like statins, are known to greatly increase the incidence of heart failure. Hello, heart failure is a major danger for diabetics.

Lying to a grand jury? What were Federal prosecutors in SF doing looking into the use of steroids by high end athletes? Protecting the free world from terrorists? Protecting the citizens of SF from oil spills before they happen because some incompetents are manning huge ships and are sufficiently undertrained to run them into a freakin bridge? Protecting against the corruption that has lead to the beginnings of what could be the biggest financial crisis that his hit this country since the 30s? (notice here that I have not listed the "War on Drugs", those other ones, which I think is a tragey farse and won't).

Nope, these guys have spent untold resources on protecting guys like Bonds from hurting exactly whom? Themselves. Bonds, from what I can tell, didn't want their help. So in whose name do they Act? Don't tell me Babe Ruth because the last time I looked he, like his records, has no life. The integrity of pro sports? Sorry, that ain't what we're paying those boys for and besides, imo, that ship has done sailed and it ain't coming back!

This indictment is yet another attempt by a corrupted Department of Justice, which in case you forgot stands accused of having corrupted the entire U.S. Attorney system, to deflect the attention away from that very corruption and the other horrific shortcomings of government that are going on all around us. The sad thing is that it seems, time and again, to actually work.

[wilson]

Doesn't the latest wrinkle in the BALCO saga leave ARod feeling like a million bucks? Well OK, he already feels like 275 million bucks, but I think this is the best thing that could happen to a guy who, by all accounts, "desperately wants to be loved." (I'm virtually positive I've read that exact statement about him before.)
Now he gains a ton of fans who, knowing that he's generally agreed upon as a "clean" guy, want to root for him more than they ever thought possible. He's already on a solid trajectory toward Bonds'* record, and barring injury, should easily eclipse it. Lots of people who find ARod somehow unloveable, if not outright distasteful, will begin to root him on if for no other reason so that we can rid ourselves of the hand-wringing that now accompanies the home run (non-)record.
As for the single-season mark, I fear we're stuck with it for a long time. That one has been utterly destroyed by the steroid era, with something like 8(?) individual seasons now bettering Maris' mark.

[allenmurray]

[QUOTE=greybeard;63030]Then they'd have just indicted the doctor along with Bonds.

QUOTE]

Not if the drug was for legitimate medical reasons.

You seem to still be missing the point. Unless your point is that we shouldn't regulate drugs and require they be prescribed under a physicians supervision at all. Maybe anybody should just be able to walk into CVS and buy some HGH, or Oxycontin, or whatever they like and take as much as they like. Hey it's their body, right?

Folks are fond of saying that steroids weren't against the rules of baseball when Bonds took them - but it has always been against the law to use prescription medications without a doctor's prescription. Frankly, for all of its problems I kind of like the system where the FDA contr5ols durgs, doctor's prescribe them and pharmacists dispense them. My geuss is that is has saved a quite a few more lives than it has cost.

[Channing]

From all I've heard or read about Barry Bonds - and that's my ONLY source - I don't necessarily care for the guy. And I'd applaud his "home run king" title being taken from him based on steroid use, but this? I think it's over the top (granted I haven't read all the facts, accusations).

But to my knowledge, Bonds hasn't hurt anyone. He's a freakin' baseball player...and a father. And when it comes to being corrupt or dishonest, I'd trust Bonds over the Federal Government any day.

It scares the fing-fong out of me whenever I see the Feds jumping in on a case like this. Like they can just single anyone out they want to in order to "set an example." I know. Maybe he did commit perjury, obstruction of justice but come on. In this whole steroids debacle, if the playing field were level, you'd be indicting a hell of lot more people than just Barry Bonds.

Let baseball take care of Bonds. This just smells of rotten federal fish.

-EarlJam

P.S. If anyone with federal government connections is reading this board, please know that EarlJam loves his country and respects his government. Nothing personal at all (i.e., please don't kill me).

THIS IS NOT AN INDICTMENT FOR STEROIDS. He was given immunity when he went to testify in front of the grand jury. He would not have been indicted for anything except perjury stemming from his testimony. Baseball cannot take care of Bonds' dishonesty in this manner. I personally do not just say "come on" to someone who lies to a federal grand jury. That is a big no-no.

Second point . . . LOOK (http://www.ajc.com/metro/%63ontent/metro/stories/2007/11/15/clinchsheriff_1116.html) There are normal people that get hit with these indictments as well. Not just celebrities.

[elvis14]

THIS IS NOT AN INDICTMENT FOR STEROIDS. He was given immunity when he went to testify in front of the grand jury. He would not have been indicted for anything except perjury stemming from his testimony. Baseball cannot take care of Bonds' dishonesty in this manner. I personally do not just say "come on" to someone who lies to a federal grand jury. That is a big no-no.

Second point . . . LOOK (http://www.ajc.com/metro/%63ontent/metro/stories/2007/11/15/clinchsheriff_1116.html) There are normal people that get hit with these indictments as well. Not just celebrities.

This is a witch hunt. Barry may have been given immunity from legal prosecution when he was called to the witches tribunal. But in today's society there's much more to it than legal prosecution. Did they offer Barry sealed records and immunity from MLB moving against him? Of course not. Because it wasnt' the truth they were after, they were after Barry Bonds. This whole steroid controversy has been and continues to be about Bonds breaking records that a bunch of old white guys hold near and dear to their hearts. I've heard the biggest abusers in MLB were pitchers using various substances to recover from injuries and recover between starts but none of those guys passed Ruth/Maris/Aaron so nobody cares. The whole thing makes me sick. They changed the rules in baseball (which was the right thing to do) to clean up the game going FORWARD. Why go BACKWARDS? What does it really do? It gives the old timers who hate Barry a chance to strike out against their symbol of evil. I'll be switching sportscenter and every other program off every time I hear something about this witch hunt. I think that's what bothers me most. At a time when I should be hearing about the 2nd half of the NFL season, the beginning of the NBA and college hoops season, all we are going to hear about is this witch hunt. Annoying!!! Heck, I can't believe I skimmed some of this thread and I'm posting! Now I'm even more annoyed, I'm a sell out! I hope Barry DH's somewhere for free and hits 40 HR's next year to break 800.

[cato]

Then they'd have just indicted the doctor along with Bonds.

BTW, doctors prescribe all sorts of legal drugs that are doing untold damage as we speak. Everyone knows of the "risks" to taking statins, er, great potential for heart failure, yet the dudes who make and pedal these drugs advertise on television. Oh, these ads, some of them at least, recite a litany of possible side effects that could fell an elephant, I'm not sure the ones for lipatur even do that, but the very purpose of the ads, and their effect, is to get john q public to search out docs who will proscribe them, if their own doctors won't. Or am I missing something.

True story. Some doctor, I forget his name but he wrote a book I believe, made a discovery. Testosterone, properly managed, can safely control, if not eliminate, diabetes. Yeap, that is what he in his extensive practice discovered. Lots of anechdotal evidence to support it. The AMA ruined the poor son of a gun. Or it might have been prosecutors at the AMA's and the drug industry's proddings. Meanwhile, diabetics, especially type IIs, get set up with drugs, including some very dangerous ones that, like statins, are known to greatly increase the incidence of heart failure. Hello, heart failure is a major danger for diabetics.

Lying to a grand jury? What were Federal prosecutors in SF doing looking into the use of steroids by high end athletes? Protecting the free world from terrorists? Protecting the citizens of SF from oil spills before they happen because some incompetents are manning huge ships and are sufficiently undertrained to run them into a freakin bridge? Protecting against the corruption that has lead to the beginnings of what could be the biggest financial crisis that his hit this country since the 30s? (notice here that I have not listed the "War on Drugs", those other ones, which I think is a tragey farse and won't).

Nope, these guys have spent untold resources on protecting guys like Bonds from hurting exactly whom? Themselves. Bonds, from what I can tell, didn't want their help. So in whose name do they Act? Don't tell me Babe Ruth because the last time I looked he, like his records, has no life. The integrity of pro sports? Sorry, that ain't what we're paying those boys for and besides, imo, that ship has done sailed and it ain't coming back!

This indictment is yet another attempt by a corrupted Department of Justice, which in case you forgot stands accused of having corrupted the entire U.S. Attorney system, to deflect the attention away from that very corruption and the other horrific shortcomings of government that are going on all around us. The sad thing is that it seems, time and again, to actually work.

As usual, your semi-coherent torrent of words obfuscates your dodge. Do you approve of lying to federal grand juries, or not?

[Bluedawg]

I get happy every time I read the title of this thread.

[Channing]

This is a witch hunt. Barry may have been given immunity from legal prosecution when he was called to the witches tribunal. But in today's society there's much more to it than legal prosecution. Did they offer Barry sealed records and immunity from MLB moving against him? Of course not. Because it wasnt' the truth they were after, they were after Barry Bonds. This whole steroid controversy has been and continues to be about Bonds breaking records that a bunch of old white guys hold near and dear to their hearts. I've heard the biggest abusers in MLB were pitchers using various substances to recover from injuries and recover between starts but none of those guys passed Ruth/Maris/Aaron so nobody cares. The whole thing makes me sick. They changed the rules in baseball (which was the right thing to do) to clean up the game going FORWARD. Why go BACKWARDS? What does it really do? It gives the old timers who hate Barry a chance to strike out against their symbol of evil. I'll be switching sportscenter and every other program off every time I hear something about this witch hunt. I think that's what bothers me most. At a time when I should be hearing about the 2nd half of the NFL season, the beginning of the NBA and college hoops season, all we are going to hear about is this witch hunt. Annoying!!! Heck, I can't believe I skimmed some of this thread and I'm posting! Now I'm even more annoyed, I'm a sell out! I hope Barry DH's somewhere for free and hits 40 HR's next year to break 800.

Actually, the grand jury records were supposed to be sealed. They were leaked - that is a huge offense, and the authors of Game of Shadows faced criminal prosecution for not giving up their source. You dont need to promise anyone confidential grand jury hearings. They should be - they were leaked. . . sorry.

[wilson]

As usual, your semi-coherent torrent of words obfuscates your dodge. Do you approve of lying to federal grand juries, or not?

I don't really think it's a dodge...lying or not lying to the grand jury is basically immaterial to greybeard's point, which is that this is an attempt by the DOJ to divert attention from its own problems of corruption and untrustworthiness.
As for the remainder of greybeard's point (the bit about pro athletes being poor pawns of the scheming, diabolical owners), I'm not exactly jumping on board.

[greybeard]

As usual, your semi-coherent torrent of words obfuscates your dodge. Do you approve of lying to federal grand juries, or not?

What dodge are you talking about and why should I answer your question?

Did you approve of people refusing to answer questions and going to jail in the 50s before grand juries posed by prosecutors who wanted them to lie and out their colleagues as communists? Do you approve of the treatment of McDougal by prosecutors who gave her use immunity and promised not to prosecute her for her supposed role in Whitewater but only if she told them what they wanted to hear?

You can suppose all you want that that guy who went to jail rather than testify before a grand jury was taking a bullet for Bonds, but the reality is that you will never know. Never.

I believe that grand juries are misused much more than you can imagine. I believe that fervently. I have known innocent people, people who were exonerated without ever having to put an affirmative defense on, in very high profile cases, who were indicted in a laundry list of charges that were complete fabrications. One in particular, was convicted by the press and the media for over a year; the jury after a several month trial brought back an acquital on all charges after less than a day. Let me repeat that, less than a day. No, no one in the media to my knowledge ever said, "Oops, sorry about that," like at least some in the media did with regard to the Duke III, for all it did the Duke III.

Nope, this guy was railroaded for political purposes by one of the most visable prosecutors in the country who had zilch, nada, nothing for a case. The prosecutor in that case got an indictment on testimony that he knew was false. The rest of his case barely qualified as smoke and mirrors. So much for grand juries and people respecting them. The prosecutor subordined purjury and everyone on that jury knew it. Every last one of them.

Political prosecutions are wrong and I believe that this is one of them. The answer to your question is that I do not chose to answer. Sorry, you cannot make me. No immunity to grant and power to compel.

Now, for real, you answer this question. If the prosecutors had Balco dead to rights, and were not interested in prosecuting Bonds for having broken the law, then why did they need his testimony. Why did they put on this circus and grant him immunity and ask him questions that they pretend that they knew the answers to and were completely unnecessary to pursuing anyone that they were interested in pursuing?

If you provide a compelling answer to that question, I'll consider answering yours. Good luck!

[cato]

Why did they put on this circus and grant him immunity and ask him questions that they pretend that they knew the answers to and were completely unnecessary to pursuing anyone that they were interested in pursuing?

If you provide a compelling answer to that question, I'll consider answering yours. Good luck!

What make Bonds special? A number of ballplayers testified in exchange for immunity. Many of them admitted to using steriods, and when their testimony was leaked, they suffered the consequences in the court of public opinion. Bonds did not take the same route -- either because he didn't use steroids or because he didn't want to suffer the consequences of admitting to his steroid use.

If Barry Bonds lied when his peers told the truth, he did it in order to profit from his lies. If that's the case, I have no sympathy for the guy. There is a simple and complete defense to perjury: don't lie under oath.

[greybeard]

I don't really think it's a dodge...lying or not lying to the grand jury is basically immaterial to greybeard's point, which is that this is an attempt by the DOJ to divert attention from its own problems of corruption and untrustworthiness.
As for the remainder of greybeard's point (the bit about pro athletes being poor pawns of the scheming, diabolical owners), I'm not exactly jumping on board.

I don't think athletes, at least the stars, are anybody's pawns. In football, at least, I think that the littles are badly, badly, badly misused by the sport. I'm talking badly. Do I think that they are pawns. No. Do I think that owners should clean up the game on the field to make it safer, instead of running that thing on what was it, TNT, about FEAR, with guys like LT talking about going out to hurt people, you bettchya.

My point about steroid use in baseball is that the owners were complicitous. More than that, they were willing to pay second basemen in the multiple millions but only if they could jack out 15 homers and hit the ball hard in the gaps. If it took steroids, wink wink, well, if a tree falls in the forest . . . .

The guys who are hurt are not the guys in the bigs. They are the high school kids. Now, if the high school coaches, and the kids' parents can't stop them, and the price for being able to possibly hit 15 out will get you millions, who do you blame for the steroid use?

Bobby Bonds cannot possibly be the answer. Not possible, sorry. The second basemen who made a killing, that center fielder for the Orioles who all of a sudden went from hitting dust to jacking out 50, the owners, our permissive society, a communist conspiracy?

You chose. Me, I ain't blaming no one; I'm only glad my kid never could hit a fastball, much less a curve, and take comfort in his being a long and lanky soccer player, who is smart enough to avoid unnecessary contact even if it would strike "fear" in an opponent. He perfers to just outplay them.

I do not think that this prosecution will do a damn thing for anyone, except the league owners and Bud who, after sullying their hands and raking in the dough, get to keep the integrity of the game intact.

As for the records, I say like Mark Anthony, "the evil that men do lives after them, the good is off interred with their bones." Let's stop worshiping things past. When I was growing up, lots of kids liked memorizing the stuff on the backs of baseball cards; me, I liked flipping them. Also thought catching and throwing were the most fun things imaginable (never could hit). Still do.

[EarlJam]

...that center fielder for the Orioles who all of a sudden went from hitting dust to jacking out 50...?



That would be Brady Anderson. That year he hit more than 50 home runs is the only year Steroids should have been legal (in my humble black and oranged heart's opinion).

-EarlJam

[greybeard]

That would be Brady Anderson. That year he hit more than 50 home runs is the only year Steroids should have been legal (in my humble black and oranged heart's opinion).

-EarlJam

Saw him hit one at the one game I ever went to. Didn't see anything illegal about it myself. Get me immunity, and tickets to the Cornell game at Cameron, and I'll swear to it before anybody. Hey, I still got this way cool orange alpacha sweater, a V neck pullover, from high school days long ago. Puffy sleaves, way cool. For you EJ, I could do a good price. ;)

[YmoBeThere]

My point about steroid use in baseball is that the owners were complicitous.

who do you blame for the steroid use?

Bobby Bonds cannot possibly be the answer. Not possible, sorry. The second basemen who made a killing, that center fielder for the Orioles who all of a sudden went from hitting dust to jacking out 50, the owners, our permissive society, a communist conspiracy?

Me, I ain't blaming no one;


Wow, a lot of words, but I am not certain what you said? And what the heck does it have to do with perjury charges against Barry Bonds?

None of what you have presented obviates the need for truthfulness in front of a federal grand jury. Simple, easy, and always true.

Also, just because you can't prosecute all the actors in a conspiracy, you shouldn't go after any? The main target of the federal probe was BALCO, not baseball itself. By perjuring himself, Bonds widened the probe to include himself.

Should the owners be reprimanded and punished for their complicity? The free market allows the individual to do so: don't watch baseball on TV, express your disapproval to the advertisers, don't attend a game, don't buy an XM satellite radio because they have the MLB games on there, etc.

If you are against everything, you stand for nothing.

[elvis14]

The main target of the federal probe was BALCO, not baseball itself. By perjuring himself, Bonds widened the probe to include himself.

No way. The federal probe was and is about Bonds. BALCO is just collateral damage. If Bonds told the truth, he would have gotten screwed by baseball and ESPN's court of public opinion (where he's already a loser). If he lies, he gets prosecuted as soon as they can dig up enough for an indictment. They are just pissed that they couldn't put it together before Bonds hit 756. Either way, the witch hunt for Bonds trudges forward.

What a ridiculous waste of our tax money! Let baseball change their rules and enforce them going forward.

[YmoBeThere]

No way. The federal probe was and is about Bonds. BALCO is just collateral damage.

Ummm.....no.

"Barry Bonds testified on Dec. 4, 2003, before a federal grand jury in San Francisco that was investigating the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative's distribution of steroids and other banned performance-enhancing drugs."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/11/16/MN9CPRF7F.DTL

He only got more involved because his trainer was pushing the drugs...

[greybeard]

Wow, a lot of words, but I am not certain what you said? And what the heck does it have to do with perjury charges against Barry Bonds?

None of what you have presented obviates the need for truthfulness in front of a federal grand jury. Simple, easy, and always true.

Also, just because you can't prosecute all the actors in a conspiracy, you shouldn't go after any? The main target of the federal probe was BALCO, not baseball itself. By perjuring himself, Bonds widened the probe to include himself.

Should the owners be reprimanded and punished for their complicity? The free market allows the individual to do so: don't watch baseball on TV, express your disapproval to the advertisers, don't attend a game, don't buy an XM satellite radio because they have the MLB games on there, etc.

If you are against everything, you stand for nothing.

What I said was, the issue about steroid use, in my opinion, is a health issue--one that stems from the indemic use by pro baseball players, journeyman, who make multiple millions only because of the use of such drugs, and the effect such use and rewards have on aspiring teenage ballplayers.

None of them thinks they are going to be Barry Bonds and takes steroids at 15 on the chance that they will. Now, who is responsible, to blame, if you will, for such use. Pick em; it ain't Barry Bonds, in my opinion.

What does that have to do with the question you pose, whether it is ever just to lie before a grand jury? That's easy, nothing. That question was not in play in the post I was replying to.

You want my truthful and thoughtful answer to the latter question, see my response to Cato's insistance that I answer set forth above.

Is it ever just to use a grand jury for a political show--to present perjured testimony to a grand jury for such purposes? Does it happen? Yes!

If a guy sits in the slammer for over a year because he will not testify because he will be prosecuted for perjury unless he gives prosecutors the answers they want, is it safe to assume that when he finally gives them the answers they want that he is telling the truth? We are, after all, by your account talking about a drug dealer. He was biting the bullet to protect a client? Say what?

Nope, I ain't answering your question and your limp hide-the-pea game won't make me. I find the question, in context, irrelevant!

[greybeard]

What make Bonds special? A number of ballplayers testified in exchange for immunity. Many of them admitted to using steriods, and when their testimony was leaked, they suffered the consequences in the court of public opinion. Bonds did not take the same route -- either because he didn't use steroids or because he didn't want to suffer the consequences of admitting to his steroid use.

If Barry Bonds lied when his peers told the truth, he did it in order to profit from his lies. If that's the case, I have no sympathy for the guy. There is a simple and complete defense to perjury: don't lie under oath.

1. We know that the Feds decided to prosecute Bonds for perjury after they finally got the Balco guy to tell them what they wanted to hear.

2. We know that the Balco guy refused to answer their question and stayed in jail for more than a year before he cracked because he knew that if he testified but did not say what they wanted they'd throw the book at him for his drug dealing and obstruction, perjury, and who knows maybe a RICO thrown in, and try to put him away forever.

3. You presuppose that the Balco guy sat in jail all that time because he wanted to protect a client, Bonds. A drug dealer sitting in the slammer when he has a get-out-of-jail-free card to protect a drug user. That's rich. Possible, I suppose, but not my personal best guess, which, imo, is all it is and will ever be, a guess.

4. Real prosecutors don't rest cases that have no practical significance on "maybe" testimony. Politicos do, all the time. Read em and weep, so goes the Republic.

So, don't have no sympathy, weep for the system, which case you ain't been watchin lately is dangerously threatened. No, not just Nifong. There were 7 (I think that is the number) U.S. Attorneys fired because they refused to use their prosecutorial powers in service of partisan political pressures by high ranking Republican officials. People in the Justice department lied about it, the Attorney General himself to Congress. The Attorney General is under investigation by the IG for the Justice Department, Glen Fine, who I can tell you is above reproach and also the quickest thing you ever saw on a basketball court this side of A.I., just ask James Brown with whom he played, for lying to Congress for that very thing. If Glen brings a case it will not be based upon no testimony remotely in the same universe as the suspect testimony of that Balco guy. Bet on it.

You hearin me, the boyz who are indicting Barry Bonds work for a guy who was appointed to his position by the same guy who made Gonzales his Attorney General. This prosecution means nothing to anyone except the guys who wrote a book spelling out all the secret grand jury testimony against Bonds and who are preparing for a second printing as we speak. They are resting their case on testimony that they coerced.

These things trouble me. That you would have no sympathy for Bonds if he lied before the grand jury doesn't.

[allenmurray]

This whole steroid controversy has been and continues to be about Bonds breaking records that a bunch of old white guys hold near and dear to their hearts. .

Thats right! It is just a bunch of old white guys who rae angry that bonds is gong to break a record held by another white guy. What? Hank Aaron isn't white? Oh, never mind.

[Channing]

1. We know that the Feds decided to prosecute Bonds for perjury after they finally got the Balco guy to tell them what they wanted to hear.

2. We know that the Balco guy refused to answer their question and stayed in jail for more than a year before he cracked because he knew that if he testified but did not say what they wanted they'd throw the book at him for his drug dealing and obstruction, perjury, and who knows maybe a RICO thrown in, and try to put him away forever.

3. You presuppose that the Balco guy sat in jail all that time because he wanted to protect a client, Bonds. A drug dealer sitting in the slammer when he has a get-out-of-jail-free card to protect a drug user. That's rich. Possible, I suppose, but not my personal best guess, which, imo, is all it is and will ever be, a guess.

4. Real prosecutors don't rest cases that have no practical significance on "maybe" testimony. Politicos do, all the time. Read em and weep, so goes the Republic.

So, don't have no sympathy, weep for the system, which case you ain't been watchin lately is dangerously threatened. No, not just Nifong. There were 7 (I think that is the number) U.S. Attorneys fired because they refused to use their prosecutorial powers in service of partisan political pressures by high ranking Republican officials. People in the Justice department lied about it, the Attorney General himself to Congress. The Attorney General is under investigation by the IG for the Justice Department, Glen Fine, who I can tell you is above reproach and also the quickest thing you ever saw on a basketball court this side of A.I., just ask James Brown with whom he played, for lying to Congress for that very thing. If Glen brings a case it will not be based upon no testimony remotely in the same universe as the suspect testimony of that Balco guy. Bet on it.

You hearin me, the boyz who are indicting Barry Bonds work for a guy who was appointed to his position by the same guy who made Gonzales his Attorney General. This prosecution means nothing to anyone except the guys who wrote a book spelling out all the secret grand jury testimony against Bonds and who are preparing for a second printing as we speak. They are resting their case on testimony that they coerced.

These things trouble me. That you would have no sympathy for Bonds if he lied before the grand jury doesn't.

I assume the BALCO guy you are talking about is Greg Anderson, Bonds' trainer. He is the one who sat in jail. However, from every report that has come out, Anderson didn't flip. The feds made their case without him. Once they were able to indict bonds, they could no longer hold Anderson for being in contempt for failing to testify against Bonds and help indict him.

[JasonEvans]

First of all, I am stunned there are people who actually are defending Barry Bonds so strongly. I can see a difference of opinion about many things regarding baseball and steroids but this really has nothing to do with that. This is about Barry Bonds conduct before a grand jury.

It really never had occurred to me that folks could have a problem with the investigation into BALCO or that people thought the target of that investigation was Bonds. The facts behind the investigation make that allegation farcical. The way the BALCO investigation began had nothing to do with Bonds. The investigation was launched when a track coach informed the US Anti-Doping Agency that a special steroid existed that current tests could not detect. He provided them with a sample of that steroid and the USADA went to other government agencies (FDA, IRS, and FBI) to help figure out what was going on. The investigation began in the track and field world. It was only after grabbing a bunch of BALCO records that the investigators discovered Barry Bonds and his trainer Greg Anderson were connected to BALCO.

The notion that the grad jury was some kind of anti-Bonds witch hunt and that Barry had no choice but to lie to the GJ is also ludicrous. First of all, Bonds' testimony was supposed to be sealed and the two San Fran Chronicle reporters who published it were almost sent to prison over it. The lawyer who leaked the info is in a heap of trouble, facing $250k in fines and up to 2 years in prison for leaking the info. I am fairly sure he will be disbarred as well. If the prosecutors or anyone else wanted that info leaked, they sure are not showing it. It is also worth noting that the leaker is a former BALCO defense lawyer, someone who should have had an interest in protecting Bonds at least a little bit. So, it is not like the prosecutors took Barry's testimony and promptly faxed it to the nearest journalist.

Assuming Bonds did lie to the grand jury -- and there appears to be a fair amount of evidence showing that, including documentation that Barry knew he had failed steroid tests -- Barry's present problems are 100% the fault of Barry Bonds. Barry thought he could get away with lying and he found out that is not the case. When you go before a grand jury, you tell the truth. Period, end of story.

I think it is essential that juries be able to count on sworn-in witnesses to tell the truth. It is a major cornerstone of our ability to have a fair trial-by-jury system. If high profile people lie and it makes news, that is all the better as it teaches the general public that there is great peril in swearing an oath to tell the truth and then breaking that oath.

--Jason "Barry should have told the truth the first time-- better to be in trouble with baseball than with the feds" Evans

[billybreen]

First of all, I am stunned there are people who actually are defending Barry Bonds so strongly. I can see a difference of opinion about many things regarding baseball and steroids but this really has nothing to do with that. This is about Barry Bonds conduct before a grand jury.

It really never had occurred to me that folks could have a problem with the investigation into BALCO or that people thought the target of that investigation was Bonds. The facts behind the investigation make that allegation farcical. The way the BALCO investigation began had nothing to do with Bonds. The investigation was launched when a track coach informed the US Anti-Doping Agency that a special steroid existed that current tests could not detect. He provided them with a sample of that steroid and the USADA went to other government agencies (FDA, IRS, and FBI) to help figure out what was going on. The investigation began in the track and field world. It was only after grabbing a bunch of BALCO records that the investigators discovered Barry Bonds and his trainer Greg Anderson were connected to BALCO.

The notion that the grad jury was some kind of anti-Bonds witch hunt and that Barry had no choice but to lie to the GJ is also ludicrous. First of all, Bonds' testimony was supposed to be sealed and the two San Fran Chronicle reporters who published it were almost sent to prison over it. The lawyer who leaked the info is in a heap of trouble, facing $250k in fines and up to 2 years in prison for leaking the info. I am fairly sure he will be disbarred as well. If the prosecutors or anyone else wanted that info leaked, they sure are not showing it. It is also worth noting that the leaker is a former BALCO defense lawyer, someone who should have had an interest in protecting Bonds at least a little bit. So, it is not like the prosecutors took Barry's testimony and promptly faxed it to the nearest journalist.

Assuming Bonds did lie to the grand jury -- and there appears to be a fair amount of evidence showing that, including documentation that Barry knew he had failed steroid tests -- Barry's present problems are 100% the fault of Barry Bonds. Barry thought he could get away with lying and he found out that is not the case. When you go before a grand jury, you tell the truth. Period, end of story.

I think it is essential that juries be able to count on sworn-in witnesses to tell the truth. It is a major cornerstone of our ability to have a fair trial-by-jury system. If high profile people lie and it makes news, that is all the better as it teaches the general public that there is great peril in swearing an oath to tell the truth and then breaking that oath.

--Jason "Barry should have told the truth the first time-- better to be in trouble with baseball than with the feds" Evans

OMG thank you!

[wilson]

Assuming Bonds did lie to the grand jury -- and there appears to be a fair amount of evidence showing that, including documentation that Barry knew he had failed steroid tests -- Barry's present problems are 100% the fault of Barry Bonds. Barry thought he could get away with lying and he found out that is not the case. When you go before a grand jury, you tell the truth. Period, end of story.

--Jason "Barry should have told the truth the first time-- better to be in trouble with baseball than with the feds" Evans

I completely agree with you, and I have been among those who have questioned the investigation's spirit in this thread. Bonds is a cheat and a liar, and it is biting him in the I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. before our very eyes. My beef with the investigation is the same that I have with the Clinton impeachment saga: I'm not so sure so much time and money should have been invested in all of this to begin with. Bonds should pay the price for lying once the cards were on the table, but I don't think it should have gone this far. I really think the feds have bigger fish to fry.

[YmoBeThere]

Bonds will likely pay the price for lying...not knowing what illegal activity is going on out there, not sure we can know if there is or is not bigger fish to fry. Again, they started out and got to BALCO. This is an offshoot of that effort.