Barry Bonds indicted

[Wynton]

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).

[SL__72]

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.

[Edge34]

[ 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.

[SL__72]

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.

[TMTTR]

[ 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!

[Edge34]

[ 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.

[Edge34]

[ 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.

[TMTTR]

[ 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".

[Oski]

[ 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.

[SL__72]

[ 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.