Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

One of these days, celebrities are going to start taking the 5th when the DOJ "invites" you to testify at the grand jury.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This isn't a race deal, its not a baseball deal, its a lying under oath deal to me (I know there are a lot of people that it isn't just a perjury deal to, keep reading). If you lied under oath you would get in a lot of trouble -- why should Bonds play under a different set of rules? Because he was one of the greatest ever at a game? I don't even care much about the steroids (if he used them).. baseballs rules were so dumb you can't go after him for that. People shouldn't lie in court, thats pretty much what it comes down to here. If I lied in court I would expect whatever punishment the courts seemed fit if I was found it. If Bonds lied in court he should do the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally agree with you here, and 100% respect your opinion on it.....as it's in a much appreciated contrast to that segment of folks who just hate Bonds and are going to argue about anything to justify their hate.

If Bonds is convicted, he should most definately be punished just like you or me, or anyone, and baseball players shouldn't get any special treatment or attention.

I certainly think he has gotten special attention from the Govt in convening three GJ's to muster a last-second indictment....but that was all within the rule of law, and he shouldn't get special treatement to make up for it.

That said...just like you or I, he gets his fair trial, and if acquitted then it counts just the same. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree -- I will say this.

I support the indicment, I support the trial. If found guilty I will support the punishment and if found innocent I will support Barry's innocence. Either way this is supporting the judicial system.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It has become clearer in recent weeks that he fully believes that Barry has done steroids and cheated the game,

[/ QUOTE ]

So, aside from hating Bonds...you also read minds....

Sweet...

[/ QUOTE ]

Nor do I read minds. I did, however, read a few hundred posts.


[/ QUOTE ]

Feel free to link the post where I said I believe Bonds cheated the game. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
Funny how that works....

[/ QUOTE ]

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

*kiss* [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
I support the indicment, I support the trial. If found guilty I will support the punishment and if found innocent I will support Barry's innocence. Either way this is supporting the judicial system.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same here...unfortunately, that isn't how it works for the angry mob...they wait to throw support behind something only after it fits their preconceptions.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

This is very reminiscent of the case against Bill Clinton. Remember, he wasn't being pursued for getting a BJ from a fat chick in the oval office, he was being pursued for lying about it while under investigation in the Whitewater matter. Were people out to get Bill Clinton? Of course, just like they're out to get Barry Bonds. Should any of this surprise anyone? No. Ultimately, the circumstances under which the charges are being brought will affect each person's perception of the charges, it's up to you to decide whether an actual crime committed during a witch hunt is the same or different than a crime committed while a witch hunt isn't taking place.

Barry imo only did what a TON of other professional athletes did, except he was the best to begin with so he was the best with the PED's as well. He sticks out like a sore thumb because of his accomplishments and his attitude, just like Slick Willy. Both pretty much lied to some peoples' faces (people who hated them to begin with) which caused the angry mob to light the torches.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

I think the Clinton analogy is a little iffy.

Ignoring morals and whatever you think that should mean for the president, there's 100% nothing illegal about getting a hummer from a needy intern. That's a question that just has no business being asked in that situation.

Steriods in some fashion are illegal, and it's at least a question that warrents asking in this context.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

Clinton was asked about sex during a civil proceeding, not a criminal proceeding. The question was appropriate for the context of the civil lawsuit.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

Oh.

Yeah.

Grrr...

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I accept that. However, in the eyes of the law, all the authors have ever been charged with was contempt of court, making pretty much everything NT has been screaming and insulting me about pointless.

[/ QUOTE ]

i haven't been screaming anything, you're the one who's been typing in all caps. do you comprehend anything you read? red bean is saying that the reporters are guilty of several crimes, and that the only reason they haven't been prosecuted is because they're on the prosecution's side in public opinion.

but since they haven't been CHARGED, in your mind, they didn't commit a crime. right, and al capone was just a tax evader.

[ QUOTE ]
However, and I'm going to do this your way because I've been owning NT in this thread hard and now know how you probably feel in other Barry threads...

[/ QUOTE ]

lol. any time a poster feels the need to point out how hard he is owning people in every other post he makes, you can be pretty sure he is a blithering idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

NT,

All I ever said was, in the eyes of the LAW, the authors of Game of Shadows have not committed any crime. I didn't ever say they were completely innocent, but you can't sentence someone for a crime they haven't been convicted of. That's an important step you COMPLETELY ignored last night, no matter how blacked out drunk you may or may not have been.

I only posted how hard I was owning because I had the ability to get not one, but two people coming out of nowhere with baseless personal attacks. You'll notice that once I went through the steps of why THEY were wrong, they got quiet, and quick.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

Anyone read Joe Sheehan's take on BP? Sounds like he talked to RB [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

http://baseballprospectus.com/articl...articleid=6935

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I accept that. However, in the eyes of the law, all the authors have ever been charged with was contempt of court, making pretty much everything NT has been screaming and insulting me about pointless.

[/ QUOTE ]

i haven't been screaming anything, you're the one who's been typing in all caps. do you comprehend anything you read? red bean is saying that the reporters are guilty of several crimes, and that the only reason they haven't been prosecuted is because they're on the prosecution's side in public opinion.

but since they haven't been CHARGED, in your mind, they didn't commit a crime. right, and al capone was just a tax evader.

[ QUOTE ]
However, and I'm going to do this your way because I've been owning NT in this thread hard and now know how you probably feel in other Barry threads...

[/ QUOTE ]

lol. any time a poster feels the need to point out how hard he is owning people in every other post he makes, you can be pretty sure he is a blithering idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

NT,

All I ever said was, in the eyes of the LAW, the authors of Game of Shadows have not committed any crime. I didn't ever say they were completely innocent, but you can't sentence someone for a crime they haven't been convicted of. That's an important step you COMPLETELY ignored last night, no matter how blacked out drunk you may or may not have been.

I only posted how hard I was owning because I had the ability to get not one, but two people coming out of nowhere with baseless personal attacks. You'll notice that once I went through the steps of why THEY were wrong, they got quiet, and quick.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do believe the reporters would have been guilty of obstruction of justice, but for the fact the attorney that leaked the info came forward.

Again, the crime in that case would have been that they did not reveal their source; not that they published the information. The reporters made a decision to fall on the sword in the name of jounalistic integrity (whether that position happened to coincide with an ulterior motive ... such as "oh, if we give up this source, nobody is ever going to trust us again, etc.) and face the punishment.

However, in this case, the source revealed itself. At that point, the prosecutors used their discretion and decided not to pursue the reporters any further based on a number of reasons (no the least of which is the public support for the reporters) including the fact that they at least had a bona fide reason for not disclosing their sources. The conflict between the jounalistic shield versus obstruction of justice is not too uncommon. There are legitimate rights at conflict and in such cases, the reporters are stuck in between. Sometimes the reporters cave, sometimes they don't; it comes down to a personal decision.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

Oski,

You're a lawyer, so you understand the ins and outs better than I do, obviously, and what you said is a better version of what I've been trying to say. Thank you.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

politics is retarded.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

My prediction Conte and Anderson testify that Bonds didn't take PEDS, they decide to create two seperate grand jury's charging Anderson and Conte with perjury.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

Just got home from a Sports Law class with a former federal prosecutor professor. In short, he thinks there has to be some additional evidence for Bonds to get convicted.

He also hammered home that the original leaker of the grand jury testimony was a complete idiot. I think it was Conte's attorney...he leaked it then went to court and argued "this case must be dismissed because of the leak." Of course he gets caught and is currently in jail.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]

2) Cost of this investigation over four years << cost 30 minutes of the Iraq war.


[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. This is a better use of money than the most wasteful endeavor in human history.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

Here's a survey on the Bonds situation.
SI survey

edit- Lots of hate on Bonds so far but pretty divided on what to do with his stas/records.
edit again- I mean the "Roid Era" stas/records not Bonds. It's pretty overwelming against him so far.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
Here's a survey on the Bonds situation.
SI survey

edit- Lots of hate on Bonds so far but pretty divided on what to do with his stas/records.
edit again- I mean the "Roid Era" stas/records not Bonds. It's pretty overwelming against him so far.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol angryfanaments

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

After 400 votes, 80% think Bonds should be banned from baseball if found guilty. I have no idea where to start explaining how ridiculous I think that is, but wow.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

Okay: Maybe someone more well-versed in criminal law can weigh in here, but consider this:

1. The real issue here is whether Bonds lied. As I see it, there is no count in the indictment for actually taking steriods or HGH, or any PED.
2. If Bonds pleads "no contest" that has the legal effect of accepting a conviction, but that it cannot be used for a collateral purpose.
3. The only thing baseball would have against Bonds is that he pleaded no contest to perjury, etc. Otherwise, the issue of whether Bonds "cheated" has never been adjudicated in any venue where baseball has jurisdiction to claim Bonds cheated.
4. This means that baseball would have no basis for touching any of Bonds' records because he is, and never will be (at least absent any further proceedings) found a cheater.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

Deadspin did a really good piece on Bonds
[ QUOTE ]
The key point to remember in the Barry Bonds indictment that went down yesterday afternoon is that we really don't have any new information. Whatever your thoughts on Bonds, it's clear that the government is out to get him. You might think he deserves it. He probably does. But there is no smoking gun; the feds have been trying for four years to come up with the definitive piece of damning information on Bonds. They never got it, but they indicted him anyway, under the belief that an indictment would corral all the negativity toward Bonds into a public relations typhoon he couldn't escape. Considering President Bush felt compelled to release a "this is a dark day for baseball" statement yesterday, they very well may be right.

Bonds, as is his wont, is surely going to fight this every step of the way, and it's only gonna get uglier. But let's be clear: Bonds is not being indicted for taking steroids, or ruining the game, or simply being an [censored]. He's being indicted for lying about something the government has yet to prove; it's the Martha Stewart principle. It's gonna be a tough case to prove, but that's not the point of this; it never was. Right now, the general public believes there's new information about Bonds, that the government is finally punishing him for the sins we all believe he committed. There isn't ... but we want our pound of flesh. We want justice. We want to see him suffer because ... well, because he's the symbol of how confused and conflicted we are about baseball in a post-steroid age. In a complicated issue, Bonds is blissfully simple: He's a jerk, he cheated, he broke all our favorite records. We want that pound of flesh. Give it to us.

And no one's really left anymore to defend Bonds. The Giants want nothing to do with him, Bud Selig is back to his passive-aggressive press release game and even the President is eager to sell him down the river. It's just Bonds, World's Most Loyal Friend Greg Anderson and Bonds lawyers, ready to fight a legal battle that they should win, but probably can't. They're gonna get you, Barry. This isn't even about you anymore; it's about a war we lost years ago but still feel compelled to fight. We need a witch to burn. It's you, Barry; it always had to be you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

BTW lol at people not wanting Bonds on your team in that poll. I guess you don't want your team to win or you are a Red Sox fan (note this isn't a shot at Red Sox fan, but Ortiz/Manny/Bonds platoon,at LF/1B/DH) probably wouldn't work that well)

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
BTW lol at people not wanting Bonds on your team in that poll. I guess you don't want your team to win or you are a Red Sox fan (note this isn't a shot at Red Sox fan, but Ortiz/Manny/Bonds platoon,at LF/1B/DH) probably wouldn't work that well)

[/ QUOTE ]

The question wasn't if the fans wanted their team to win.

Is it so unfathomable that maybe fans don't want a walking [censored] storm around their team everyday.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
BTW lol at people not wanting Bonds on your team in that poll. I guess you don't want your team to win or you are a Red Sox fan (note this isn't a shot at Red Sox fan, but Ortiz/Manny/Bonds platoon,at LF/1B/DH) probably wouldn't work that well)

[/ QUOTE ]

The question wasn't if the fans wanted their team to win.

Is it so unfathomable that maybe fans don't want a walking [censored] storm around their team everyday.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think it's ridiculous that fans don't want there teams to optimize winning.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
BTW lol at people not wanting Bonds on your team in that poll. I guess you don't want your team to win or you are a Red Sox fan (note this isn't a shot at Red Sox fan, but Ortiz/Manny/Bonds platoon,at LF/1B/DH) probably wouldn't work that well)

[/ QUOTE ]

The question wasn't if the fans wanted their team to win.

Is it so unfathomable that maybe fans don't want a walking [censored] storm around their team everyday.

[/ QUOTE ]

If Bonds gets cleared and the Twins decide they want to make a move and spend the money on a DH, and they get him, more power to them. I don't really think it would be a good move, especially in a market where athletes are loved at LEAST as much for their relationship with the media and fans as they are for their on-field prowess.

Signing Bonds, aside from being completely unrealistic, would also go against everything the organization has stood for in bringing the Twins back to relevance after a rough 1990s.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
BTW lol at people not wanting Bonds on your team in that poll. I guess you don't want your team to win or you are a Red Sox fan (note this isn't a shot at Red Sox fan, but Ortiz/Manny/Bonds platoon,at LF/1B/DH) probably wouldn't work that well)

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a totally visceral reaction, and completely understandable, IMO. Hell, I'm a Giants fan, and I'm pretty sure they can finish in last place without him.

I do wonder where management will put the Barry Bronze statue, especially if this doesn't turn out well.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
Right now, the general public believes there's new information about Bonds...there isn't...

[/ QUOTE ]

But it looks like there is - at least one of his perjuries is linked to a positive steroid test.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
BTW lol at people not wanting Bonds on your team in that poll. I guess you don't want your team to win or you are a Red Sox fan (note this isn't a shot at Red Sox fan, but Ortiz/Manny/Bonds platoon,at LF/1B/DH) probably wouldn't work that well)

[/ QUOTE ]

The question wasn't if the fans wanted their team to win.

Is it so unfathomable that maybe fans don't want a walking [censored] storm around their team everyday.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think it's ridiculous that fans don't want there teams to optimize winning.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) Ridiculously expensive.

2) Injury prone. Like it or not, he's 43 and has has bad knees.

3) Defensive liability. Paying that much for a guy who you might get one, MAYBE two years out of to pretty much ONLY be a Designated Hitter doesn't make much sense.

You can win without Barry Bonds, as evidenced by the fact that he's never won a World Series ring. I don't think signing Bonds "optimizes winning" for every team, maybe no more than a few.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
Even before the indictment, I don't believe there were many teams interested. Oakland was the only team I ever heard mentioned. And he's just not productive enough anymore to merit the backlash.


[/ QUOTE ]

The guy is still an awesome hitter, he's just hurt a lot. Maybe mere excellence isn't good enough--I actually don't think it is.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
You can win without Barry Bonds, as evidenced by the fact that he's never won a World Series ring.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is a totally meaningless argument. There is obviously no player who is 100% necessary to win the World Series, and I can't even believe you'd offer up something so simpleminded.

Besides which, weren't the Giants like 6 outs away with a 5 run lead or something crazy? And didn't Bonds have the best World Series performance EVER during that series?

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

I can't believe how many people (here and elsewhere) think they have some idea about the evidence the government possesses.

Federal prosecutors do not routinely set forth their evidence in an indictment. Indeed, the defense is often unaware of the most significant evidence until fairly close to trial. It's going to be a while before anyone has an informed view about how likely a conviction is (absent leaks, at least).

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

Which is completely ridiculous. All signs point to Barry Bonds being less of a [censored] then Kirby Puckett who is still probably the most beloved athlete here.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can win without Barry Bonds, as evidenced by the fact that he's never won a World Series ring.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is a totally meaningless argument. There is obviously no player who is 100% necessary to win the World Series, and I can't even believe you'd offer up something so simpleminded.

Besides which, weren't the Giants like 6 outs away with a 5 run lead or something crazy? And didn't Bonds have the best World Series performance EVER during that series?

[/ QUOTE ]

I know that. That was obviously kinda sarcastic in that the idea presented by Pudge was "OMG, you don't want your team to optimize winning by signing Bonds?!"

Bonds did play very well in that Series. However, my greater point is that handcuffing yourself with an injury prone defensive liability with a huge salary is the worst way to go about it, unless you're a team like the Yankees or Sox that can just throw money at their problems.

Teams like Cleveland, Minnesota, Colorado, and the like don't win throwing money at players they can't do anything with in a long run.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

He has a lot to offer to a lot of AL teams. Its not like he'd be looking for a 10 year deal. We are talking about, likely, a 1 year deal. Maybe with some sort of option for a 2nd year.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

An analogous situation would be, if TMTTR jaywalked seven years ago, the cop on the scene asked him under oath if he did, and TMTTR then lied about it. DUCY?

[/ QUOTE ]

you're right, that's pretty analogous. do you think TMTTR should go to jail for 30 years for that?

i do, but that's because he's a yankees fan

[/ QUOTE ]

Good afternoon!

Thanks for your support NT!

Both jaywalking analogies are bogus. Here, the federal government was investigating what they considered a serious crime -- the distribution of steroids and other controlled substances. Bonds was called before a grand jury to provide testimony about whether he was provided steroids and other controlled substances and who provided them. Before the grand jury, he was provided immunity so that nothing he said could ever be used against him. However, if he lied before the grand jury, he could be prosecuted for perjury.

This is VERY STANDARD. The U.S. Attorneys in many jurisdiction around the country will aggressively pursue persons that testify falsly -- particularly in high profile cases. You can scream about selective prosecution, but federal prosecutors zealously protect the system they rely on to catch people who break the criminal statutes of the United States -- whether they are terrorists, mafia bosses or distributors of steroids. If you get in their way, you risk being added to their list of targets -- especially if they can use you to set an example.

Hysterically, many of you think I am an idiot for stating the facts and advocating enforcement of the law -- even if it costs a little more money (and it is only "a little more money" in the grand scheme of federal law enforcement).

Back to the analogy: I jaywalked back in 2003; because I jaywalked I witnessed a drive-by shooting; if I had crossed the street legally, I would not have been in a position to witness the shooting. I get called before the grand jury and I am granted immunity and testify. During the testimony, I refuse to admit that I jaywalked because I don't want to have the scarlet letter "J" on me for the rest of my life as a jaywalker. Because I lied about jaywalking, it is more difficult for the prosecutors to make their case against the shooters, any of my eyewitness testimony would be severly damaged by my lie, and the shooters are able to plea down to lesser crimes. NOW, after the plea bargin is complete, the prosecutor (with proof that I actually did jaywalk) goes after me for perjury because I made their job of prosecuting the real criminals more difficult and potentially made them settle for less than they otherwise would have.

THAT is the proper analogy.

AND Bonds, as a first time offender (and for various other reasons built into the Federal Sentencing Guidelines), will not get anywhere near 30 years if found guilty on all charges. As I understand it, his sentence would be anywhere from a few months to a few years. The 30 years bantied about on the news was completely wrong.

Have a great day!

Go Yankees! Go A-Rod! Come home, Lowell!

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
Which is completely ridiculous. All signs point to Barry Bonds being less of a [censored] then Kirby Puckett who is still probably the most beloved athlete here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kirby smiled to the cameras and was pleasant to all the fans. The one major knock on him was that sexual assault case that he was tried for - and subsequently acquitted.

I wouldn't say there's a whole lot saying Kirby's a bigger [censored] than Bonds. Was Kirby a saint? Probably not, but he never did much to discredit his public image.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
He has a lot to offer to a lot of AL teams. Its not like he'd be looking for a 10 year deal. We are talking about, likely, a 1 year deal. Maybe with some sort of option for a 2nd year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, like I said, if the Twins decide that its a good move, and he's not in jail (obv), then of course he has a lot to offer. He can hit the PISS out of a ball. He brings a TON of baggage with him and following this indictment, even if he plays next year it'll be an even bigger distraction than his chase of Aaron's record was.

I don't think signing him makes a lot of long-term sense. The only real value he provides is if your team thinks it is one good bat away from getting over the hump. He's not going to make a bad team a World Series contender overnight.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]

3. The only thing baseball would have against Bonds is that he pleaded no contest to perjury, etc. Otherwise, the issue of whether Bonds "cheated" has never been adjudicated in any venue where baseball has jurisdiction to claim Bonds cheated.
4. This means that baseball would have no basis for touching any of Bonds' records because he is, and never will be (at least absent any further proceedings) found a cheater.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't vouch for whether he is able to plea "no contest" or not -- I don't think he can. If he can, that plea may bar the government from using it against him in a court of law (I am not even sure of that), but certainly nothing bars a private organization (major league baseball) from relying on that plea and considering it an admission. Baseball can rely on whatever they want -- a private investigation, a public trial or the flip of a coin -- to adjust what they consider "official records".

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]

Hysterically, many of you think I am an idiot for stating the facts and advocating enforcement of the law -- even if it costs a little more money (and it is only "a little more money" in the grand scheme of federal law enforcement).



[/ QUOTE ]

For what its worth: I specifically stated you were NOT an idiot.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]

Teams like , Minnesota, , and the like don't win throwing money at players they can't do anything with in a long run.

[/ QUOTE ]
The Twins at least, win because and in spite of doing this.

Because of:
Jack Morris
Shane Mack
Chili Davis

In spite of:
Tony Batista
Rondell White
Jeff Cirillo
Rubén Sierra
Ramon Ortiz
Sidney Ponson
etc.