Barry Bonds indicted

[UATrewqaz]

I still fail to see how much money the government spent on the investigation has anything to do with Bonds guilt or innocence.

The indictment is what it is, the sunk cost is meaningless to the case.

[LesJ]

[ QUOTE ]
TMTTR,

What would you think if the Government spent millions of dollars, and many years of efforts to finally get enough evidence to go to trial about whether or not you jaywalked on October 21st, 1990?

[/ QUOTE ]

That is completely analogous to the Bonds/steroids issue. The similarities are almost eerie in nature.

[THAY3R]

[ QUOTE ]
I still fail to see how much money the government spent on the investigation has anything to do with Bonds guilt or innocence.



[/ QUOTE ]

Who is arguing it does?

[Pudge714]

[ QUOTE ]
I still fail to see how much money the government spent on the investigation has anything to do with Bonds guilt or innocence.

The indictment is what it is, the sunk cost is meaningless to the case.

[/ QUOTE ]
It doesn't, but it shows they were on a witchhunt and if they were to apply the same vigilance in prosecuting Bonds as prosecuting everyone tons of other people would be facing UP TO 30 YEARS IN JAIL

[Oski]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LOL. You are certainly funnier than me, Pudge. The poll is hysterical. You keep the sensor of humor and I will keep lapping you on the intelligence side.

How about addressing the issues instead of trolling? You think Bonds doesn't deserve to be indicted for lying and obstructing justice? Do you think Bonds never used steroids?

[/ QUOTE ]

1. sensor of humor? what are you, [censored] illiterate or something?
2. did he deserve to be indicted for obstruction of justice? not after 4 years. statute of limitations should apply here just because BALCO was solved long long long long long ago.
3. they have a positive drug test for bonds. he used steroids. that doesn't change the fact that this whole process was completely pointless.
4. you're STILL a [censored] idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

By no means is TMTTR an idiot. Step back and think about his point for a bit. The whole BALCO matter was not intended to go forward as a vehicle for prosecuting perjury. However, when it seems likely that a witness is lying to a grand jury, the scope of the proceedings neccessarily expands to include prosecution for perjury.

In the grand scheme of things, it is very important that people tell the truth, especially under oath. It is a fundamendal part of our justice system and worth the expenditure of resources for its protection. At that point, it is not a matter of dollars and cents, its about maintaining our institution of law and order. If the witness would tell the truth from the beginning, this problem is avoided.

[THAY3R]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
TMTTR,

What would you think if the Government spent millions of dollars, and many years of efforts to finally get enough evidence to go to trial about whether or not you jaywalked on October 21st, 1990?

[/ QUOTE ]

That is completely analogous to the Bonds/steroids issue. The similarities are almost eerie in nature.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, for the sake of this analogy let's assume TMTTR stated under oath that he did not knowingly jaywalk.

[THAY3R]

And BTW I'm pretty sure jaywalking kills more kids a year than steroids.

[BowToYourSensei]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LOL. You are certainly funnier than me, Pudge. The poll is hysterical. You keep the sensor of humor and I will keep lapping you on the intelligence side.

How about addressing the issues instead of trolling? You think Bonds doesn't deserve to be indicted for lying and obstructing justice? Do you think Bonds never used steroids?

[/ QUOTE ]

1. sensor of humor? what are you, [censored] illiterate or something?
2. did he deserve to be indicted for obstruction of justice? not after 4 years. statute of limitations should apply here just because BALCO was solved long long long long long ago.
3. they have a positive drug test for bonds. he used steroids. that doesn't change the fact that this whole process was completely pointless.
4. you're STILL a [censored] idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

By no means is TMTTR an idiot. Step back and think about his point for a bit. The whole BALCO matter was not intended to go forward as a vehicle for prosecuting perjury. However, when it seems likely that a witness is lying to a grand jury, the scope of the proceedings neccessarily expands to include prosecution for perjury.

In the grand scheme of things, it is very important that people tell the truth, especially under oath. It is a fundamendal part of our justice system and worth the expenditure of resources for its protection. At that point, it is not a matter of dollars and cents, its about maintaining our institution of law and order. If the witness would tell the truth from the beginning, this problem is avoided.

[/ QUOTE ]

obstruction of justice applies to the (long resolved) BALCO trial. if this indictment came within the first 18 months, that's fine, but when you can't build a case years after BALCO has been resolved, and when his testimony no longer provides any use whatsoever, exactly what is the point of going after him other than an expensive witchhunt?

[UATrewqaz]

It's obvious it was a bit of a witchhunt.

Although in this case they caught an actual witch.

[Kneel B4 Zod]

^^^^ what Oski said. this originally wasn't about trying to get Bonds, but I think it largely turned into that b/c lots of folks thought he was largely lying under oath, which is a big deal.

none of this happens if Bonds testifies truthfully (and here I'm assuming he is in fact guilty)