Barry Bonds indicted

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Niss/TM/Oski/etc.
Do you think Lance Williams and Mark Faindru-Wada should be in jail for obstruction of justice?

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely.

[/ QUOTE ]

How did they "obstruct justice"?

When they refused to name their source, they were in contempt and could have been locked up; but then their source came forward and they could no longer be held in contempt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since I dont know anything about the law, do you have to like lay down in front of a cop or nail someones door shut in order to obstruct justice?

"Hey, we know you know who leaked it, who was it?"

"Not telling."

How is that not obstructing? If they had said "I wont tell you but he is on a boat in the Atlantic" and then he really wasnt on a boat in the Atlantic, is THAT obstructing?

[Troll_Inc]

[NT!]

vhawk,

it's obstruction, they just chose not to prosecute for it. people saying otherwise are just idiots.

[RedBean]

Some of the outright dishonesty in the media is shocking to me.

Let's talk Mark Fainara-Bada-Bing-Bang.....who today on ESPN wrote this excerpt, surmising that the allegation of a failed steroid test in Nov 2000 is "previously undisclosed new information":

[ QUOTE ]

'...The item that jumped from the 10-page indictment was the revelation of "positive tests for the presence of steroids ...'

'.. informed him about a drug test he had taken in November 2000 that showed he tested positive for testosterone.....

...the previously undisclosed evidence was the first glimpse of the material the government has been secretly compiling against Bonds for almost four years...


[/ QUOTE ]

Yet, almost two years ago, in the book HE WROTE....is this excerpt:

[ QUOTE ]


Bonds underwent one such screening on Nov. 18, 2000, according to BALCO documents. Quest Diagnostics ran an anabolic steroid panel on Bonds.

After the 2001 season, on Nov. 12, LabOne, another drug-testing lab, did another workup on Bonds's testosterone levels. LabOne reported a level of 11.2, which was considered abnormally high for a man of Bonds's age.



[/ QUOTE ]

Is Bada-Bing-Bang really that forgetful about what he wrote in his own book....or is he being purposefully misleading in order to create the false impression that this indictment introduces "new" allegations?

Like Will Carroll wrote in his piece on Deadspin...they need you to believe this indictment presents something new, even though it doesn't....because they couldn't get Greg to talk, and they had no choice here but to go ahead with the indictment rather than to dismiss the GJ with nothing.

The chance of a 4th GJ with a new AG taking over was slim. This is the govt's hail mary to retrieve the sunk cost of the past 4 years wasted chasing their white whale.

4 counts...
4 pitches...
4 balls...
Bonds walks.

[Troll_Inc]

The O/U on the number of months Bonds will spend in the federal pen:

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]

How did they "obstruct justice"?

When they refused to name their source, they were in contempt and could have been locked up; but then their source came forward and they could no longer be held in contempt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Better yet, how did Bonds "obstruct justice"?

The Balco defendants were indicted almost immediately after his GJ testimony, and convicted in less than a month.

[SL__72]

True.

I wasn't trying to say Bonds is a great guy, I wouldn't pretend to know that. Someone just said that the Twins were all about "character" guys and that signing Bonds would undermine that. In response I pointed out that the most beloved player in the teams history has allegedly done a lot worse [censored] then what Bonds is being accused of.

It then made me think to point out that it is ridiculous how the general public still loves Puckett and hates Bonds. Neither have been convicted of anything and I'm not saying Puckett did any of that stuff. The media really has been really unfair to Bonds.

[offTopic]

[ QUOTE ]
Some of the outright dishonesty in the media is shocking to me.

Let's talk Mark Fainara-Bada-Bing-Bang.....who today on ESPN wrote this excerpt, surmising that the allegation of a failed steroid test in Nov 2000 is "previously undisclosed new information":

[ QUOTE ]

'...The item that jumped from the 10-page indictment was the revelation of "positive tests for the presence of steroids ...'

'.. informed him about a drug test he had taken in November 2000 that showed he tested positive for testosterone.....

...the previously undisclosed evidence was the first glimpse of the material the government has been secretly compiling against Bonds for almost four years...


[/ QUOTE ]

Yet, almost two years ago, in the book HE WROTE....is this excerpt:

[ QUOTE ]


Bonds underwent one such screening on Nov. 18, 2000, according to BALCO documents. Quest Diagnostics ran an anabolic steroid panel on Bonds.

After the 2001 season, on Nov. 12, LabOne, another drug-testing lab, did another workup on Bonds's testosterone levels. LabOne reported a level of 11.2, which was considered abnormally high for a man of Bonds's age.



[/ QUOTE ]

Is Bada-Bing-Bang really that forgetful about what he wrote in his own book....or is he being purposefully misleading in order to create the false impression that this indictment introduces "new" allegations?



[/ QUOTE ]

In your first quoted section, the allegation is that Bonds tested positive in Nov 2000. In your second quoted section, he posted "abnormally high" in Nov 2001. Is this not new information?

[SL__72]

RB, it is Will Leitch, not Will Carroll. Correct me if I'm wrong, but everything Will Carroll has written about this is right here:

http://baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=679

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
In your first quoted section, the allegation is that Bonds tested positive in Nov 2000. In your second quoted section, he posted "abnormally high" in Nov 2001. Is this not new information?

[/ QUOTE ]

The allegation that Bonds failed it is "new", in so much as it wasn't presented as part of evidence previously...and one has to wonder if it can be proven, especially considering previous testimony alleges that Greg used his name to send in the tests to cover for Barry, and that the actual samples no longer exist, nor can the chain of custody be confirmed.

I just find it shocking that the same guy who knows this from seeing the original leaked transcript is now writing an article for a major media outlet acting as if he is just learning about this information, neglecting to report on it accurately as to the other facts he knows, and he is putting it forth as being a "huge body shot" to Bonds' case as if it is indisputable fact.