Barry Bonds indicted

[manbearpig]

Somebody help me with the time line of this "witch hunt."

1) Barry Bonds offered IMMUNITY to testify basically against BALCO. That means he could not get into legal trouble for anything he said. They offered him an out upfront to be honest.

2) Barry Bonds says under oath he had no idea what was going on.

3) Prosecutors disagree.

4) ???

5) Profit?


The fact of the matter is this is not about steroids. It is about lying.

Why did it take so long to indict him? They probably have a case they *think* is good but would be airtight with Anderson's testimony. So they leaned on him and when they finally realized he would not break they indicted him with the info they had.

[RedBean]

From ESPN:

[ QUOTE ]

Shaun Assael of ESPN The Magazine talked to Conte Thursday night and Conte said he may testify on Bonds' behalf that the sample the government claims Bonds tested positive for steroids is not what it seems. Conte claims it was inconclusive for many reasons.


[/ QUOTE ]

The man who ran the lab that recorded the "positive" test, Victor Conte, is prepared to testify that it "is not what it seems".

The other man who is central to each and every allegation in the indictment, Greg Anderson, has been uncooperative with the government, and just might end up testifying on Bonds behalf.

Both men have previously testified that they did not give Bonds steroids, despite their naming several others.

And truth be told, a good portion of the MLBPA lost faith in the AG's office yesterday, because people in the game see it for what it is, and they realize that it could have been anyone...had they been lucky enough to hit that many homeruns and catch the eye of an envious IRS agent.

They can't say that outloud, of course...the media, the public, hell, the whole world already has it's mind made up and would villify any sentiment that views Bonds as less than pure evil.

But say what what you want about what you think of Bonds based on your window of perception, you can't deny his ability on the field, and it should be pretty obvious by now that the man engenders fierce loyalty in those close to him.

Keep in mind, before yesterday:

1. The prosecution believed Barry lied under oath.
2. Allegations were in the public.
3. Greg was in prison.
4. Bonds was prevented by law from defending himself.

And today:

1. The prosecution believes Barry lied under oath.
2. Allegations are in the public.
3. Greg is free.
4. Barry finally gets a chance to defend himself.

#1 & #2 are unchanged.
#3 & #4 are welcome developments instead of rampant media slander and reckless speculation that he can't respond too.

The only real disappointment is that when Bonds is acquitted, the media and court of public opinion will be full of excuses instead of retractions.


The United States of America vs. Barry Lamar Bonds

Let's do it. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[manbearpig]

Just a note, mainly for RB, but for others too.

You cant have this both ways. If Kim Bell, Tim Montgomery, and other people who testify against Bonds dont "count" because of character issues, then Conte and Anderson should not be treated as infallible in their testimony either.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
Somebody help me with the time line of this "witch hunt."

1) Barry Bonds offered IMMUNITY to testify basically against BALCO. That means he could not get into legal trouble for anything he said. They offered him an out upfront to be honest.

[/ QUOTE ]

Back the train up about two more years, when IRS agent Jeff Novitsky told Agent Ira White that he thought Bonds, who he knew from working out at the same gym, was a cocy [censored] and he would love to get something on him.

After the tax evasion investigation dried up, Novitsky went dumpster diving at Balco in an unauthorized search that exploded into the 2003 investigation and subsequent GJ.

The case that despite bringing 46 counts against 4 men that had penalties of up to 40+ years for each, and airtight admissions from several pro athletes....concluded with 42 counts dropped and a quick plea agreement that guarenteed the GJ testimony remained sealed and the witnesses prevented from discussing it.

The defendants is this major case recieved between 2-4 months in jail.

It's not to far-fetched to consider that the goal all along with the offer of immunity surrounding a "big" case was to secure an admission that could later be leaked publically and smear Bonds in the court of public opinion.

Which is exactly what happened, only they had to use creative licenses and break the law along the way, since Bonds didn't admit use.

And then the whole damn thing exploded into a snowball out of control....and the government was intent on getting Bonds after it appeared he pulled the old dipsy doo on the original plan....

Fast forward to the Grimsley investigation led by Novitsky which centered around pressuring Grimsley into implicating Bonds, even trying to get him to wear a wire and approach Bonds....and then was subsequently dropped when he "only" named 20+ other players, and resulting in Grimsley being charged despite his previous cooperation and in violation of his deal with them.

And then the Sig Pharmacy investigation, where the same IRS agent, Novitsky, failed to turn up a smoking gun on Bonds, and thus the names from that case have slowly been released under mounting pressures to seek consistency amongst all players being inestigated.

And, let's not forget Greg spen 4 times as much time in prison for refusing to testify and for the Govt not honoring his plea agreement, than he did for being convicted in the original case.

If you don't quite follow how this could be interpreted as a witchhunt...then you just haven't been paying attention.

And if you honestly believe Bonds was given a fair shake and consistent attention through it all, then I just don't now what to say....but he isn't whining about it....he's ready for his day in court.

Just don't be bitching when you don't like the verdict. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
You cant have this both ways. If Kim Bell, Tim Montgomery, and other people who testify against Bonds dont "count" because of character issues, then Conte and Anderson should not be treated as infallible in their testimony either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering that Greg is explicitly named in each and every count, and the government has been wanting him to testify and has expressed as much in open court......I'd have to respectfully disagree on the level of credibility assigned to him as a witness....and the United States of America might just get what it asked for..... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

And besides, I never discounted Kim for character....only because she's told three different stories at different times....and Tim has nothing to offer but third or fourth hand hearsay which isn't admissible in court.

But you're right...no one can have it both ways.....which is ironic considering the way the media and public will react upon acquittal.

It's going to be mighty hypocritical to see all these folks who take so much delight in an indictment when they are full of nothing but excuses and rationalizations upon acquittal.

Just like in baseball, it only counts what you do on the field....in this case it only matters what happens in the courtroom.

Because in the court of public opinion, regardless of the verdict, the media and angry mob will continue to consider him guilty regardless.

[NT!]

[ 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.

[JordanIB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
RedBean,
I also saw Steve Phillips more or less guaranteeing Bonds would never play again and that he thinks there is good chance Bonds' record will not just have an asterix, but will be stricken from the record book all together.

[/ QUOTE ]

steve phillips also traded scott kazmir for victor zambrano. steve phillips don't know [censored]

[/ QUOTE ]

Good to see you have no idea what you're talking about not only wrt the Bonds issue.

[manbearpig]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not to far-fetched to consider that the goal all along with the offer of immunity surrounding a "big" case was to secure an admission that could later be leaked publically and smear Bonds in the court of public opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

So the goal all along was just to smear Barry Bonds in the court of public opinion? All the people implicated in this, all the "pharmacies" shut down, all the money spent was just a front for the ultimate goal of being able to say, "ZOMG, BB used steroids, hahaha!". Really?

Or was he just the biggest part of a far reaching investigation that some high ups thought was a good idea as part of the "war on drugs?"

Was he targeted as the main piece of this investigation? Sure he was. Is that fair? Probably not. But it comes with the territory in todays society, for better or worse.

The offer of immunity being a "gotcha" tactic is silly to think. Even if Bonds was the "big fish" that some people were after, the overall scope of the investigation was much larger and could have benefited greatly from Bonds cooperating.

[manbearpig]

RB,

In the other thread you said:

[ QUOTE ]
Montgomery is a confessed cheat and a convicted criminal

[/ QUOTE ]

when discrediting his comments.

I just want to make sure that you use that same thought process when it comes to Conte and Anderson, as they are both convicted criminals.

[Wynton]

I think it's quite reasonable to predict Bonds won't play again, at least in the US.

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.

On the other hand, I don't believe that Selig will affirmatively do anything until there is an actual conviction.