Is Barry Bonds' Trial The Hold Up?

[gobuck]

excellent, Polish. got me laughing.

 

[MarkvW]

materiality

Ok, fine. Apparently there are athletes in the world who don't lie about drug use. My bad, I exaggerated. The fact remains that a lot of them would have lied. McGwiire, Sosa, Palmeiro, Tejada. e.g., are good candidates.

MacR, I respect your opinion, but it is very debatable. There are a lot of people, including prosecutors, who don't feel that every case of lying under oath should be pursued. Very few such instances in adultery cases are gone after. Again, I'm interested in your opinion of the Clinton case. If you apply the same, regardless-of-the-nature of the testimony standard to that as you apply to Bonds,.you would have had to want him removed from office and presumably jailed. A majority of people in the U.S., and half the U.S. Senate, disagreed. Granted, politics played a major role in the Senate vote, but Clinton had huge support among the media and even among some Republicans.

The bottom line is that a large number of people, probably a substantial majority, don't make the clean separation that you apparently make between the fact of lying itself, and the nature of the deed that is lied about. And indeed, this is part of the law. I believe the jury in the Bonds case has been instructed that they can’t find him guilty, even if they believe he did lie, unless the lie had a material effect on the BALCO investigation. That he lied, per se, is not the issue.

Your position can easily be subjected to a reductio ad absurdum argument. Imagine someone on trial for committing murder while on a fishing trip. As part of the process of setting the scene, the defendant , or some witness who was there, is asked about the number or size of the fish he caught, and he lies. Is he going to be prosecuted for giving false testimony? Of course not. Not all lies are the same, some matter much more than others. And once one accepts that, then one can have a legitimate debate about whether the lie Bonds told was material enough to warrant prosecution.

You don't need all the inductive reasoning. Perjury, to be criminally actionable, must be "material." The judge, not the jury, decides the question.

 

[MarkvW]

Huh?

But didn't you say yourself that "any other ball player would have also lied" ?

Which is it?

I never said that! I was supporting your argument. Chill, daddy . . .

 

[MacRoadie]

I never said that! I was supporting your argument. Chill, daddy . . .

Sorry, that was Merckx Index...

And on that note:

Your position can easily be subjected to a reductio ad absurdum argument. Imagine someone on trial for committing murder while on a fishing trip. As part of the process of setting the scene, the defendant , or some witness who was there, is asked about the number or size of the fish he caught, and he lies. Is he going to be prosecuted for giving false testimony? Of course not. Not all lies are the same, some matter much more than others. And once one accepts that, then one can have a legitimate debate about whether the lie Bonds told was material enough to warrant prosecution.

Complete Straw Man.

Unless the murder in question involved the fish, then the the number or size of the fish is ridiculously immaterial.

Being that the federal investigation originated with BALCO and Victor Conte, accused of manufacturing and distributing designer steroids, that Greg Anderson purchased said same steroids from BALCO, and Barry Bonds was a customer of Greg Anderson (and the end user of said same steroids), I would venture to guess that Bonds' testimony on whether or not he used the illegal product manufactured by BALCO and distributed by Greg Anderson just might be a bit more germane.

If Bonds (or anyone else Anderson supplied PEDs to) testifies that he never received any peds from Anderson, then a whole host of federal charges for illegal distribution and dispensing of controlled substances are placed in jeopardy. If Anderson can't be proven to have supplied PEDs manufactured by BALCO, then charges aginst Conte may not be proven. It's foundational and of significant relevance.

If you want to use the muder analogy, then Bonds' testimony is more akin to a prosecutor calling witnesses to testify that they too bought illegal weapons from the same gun dealer that sold the murderer his weapon, only to have those other people (who aren't even on trial for the murder) testify that they never bought any guns from anyone (even though they have been seen on multiple occasions with the dealer and have the same model weapon has been seen in their possession).

 

[flicker]

http://www.mercurynews.com/mark-purdy

 

[Oldman]

Tammy Thomas had to serve 1 year home confinement for her role in Balco.

But Barry? The guy lives in a Palatial Mansion fcol.
What kind of message would THAT send?

Judge Illston should have Barry spend the year at Tammy's place.
He is a neat freak, and she has a tendency to leave the toilet seat up.
That'll learn him good.

He'd never stand up to the punishment Martha Stewart endured. She's much tougher...and she lost weight!

 

[MarkvW]

correction

Tammy got six months home detention.
Conte got four months detention.
If Bonds is found guilty, his sentence should fall between those boundaries. There does not appear to be any chance that Bonds (the client) would get more time than Conte (the dealer).

 

[fatandfast]

I have read a few places that this judge is very pro settlement. Does this mean that the Bond's team thought it was better to go all the way rather than come to some agreement? The punishment guidelines are heavy in his favor, as a millionaire it would be only slightly different to under house arrest for 90 or 120 days

 

[Oldman]

Tammy got six months home detention.
Conte got four months detention.
If Bonds is found guilty, his sentence should fall between those boundaries. There does not appear to be any chance that Bonds (the client) would get more time than Conte (the dealer).

The end product of all of this could be MLB embarrassed into and asterix for Bond's records. They should do the right thing and thank Hank Aaron for being a real guy.
If Barry likes money more than his legacy he will get off light. After all, he's got lots of friends...

 

[fatandfast]

I have read a few places that this judge is very pro settlement. Does this mean that the Bond's team thought it was better to go all the way rather than come to some agreement? The punishment guidelines are heavy in his favor, as a millionaire it would be only slightly different to under house arrest for 90 or 120 days

 

[MarkvW]

the x factor

I have read a few places that this judge is very pro settlement. Does this mean that the Bond's team thought it was better to go all the way rather than come to some agreement? The punishment guidelines are heavy in his favor, as a millionaire it would be only slightly different to under house arrest for 90 or 120 days

Barry's driving the bus. I doubt the feds would agree to any plea deal that didn't include an admission to lying about the knowing steroid use. Who knows what their position was on time. I suspect that Barry figured the difference between a plea bargain and a sentencing following trial was insubstantial--so why not roll the dice?

 

[MacRoadie]

Jury wants to see full transcript of the Steve Hoskins-Greg Anderson secretly recorded conversation. Anderson talks about injecting Bonds.

Juliet Macur Twitter

 

[Merckx index]

Complete Straw Man.

Unless the murder in question involved the fish, then the the number or size of the fish is ridiculously immaterial.

But that’s the whole point! You have basically admitted that degree of materiality is the key, whereas before you were saying, or strongly implying, that any lie should be prosecuted.

In fact, the fish might be material. Their size or number might be used to confirm, for example, where on the lake or river the murder took place. The point is that facts fall on a spectrum, from totally irrelevant to absolutely critical, and one has to determine where they lie before deciding whether false statements should be prosecuted.

Being that the federal investigation originated with BALCO and Victor Conte, accused of manufacturing and distributing designer steroids, that Greg Anderson purchased said same steroids from BALCO, and Barry Bonds was a customer of Greg Anderson (and the end user of said same steroids), I would venture to guess that Bonds' testimony on whether or not he used the illegal product manufactured by BALCO and distributed by Greg Anderson just might be a bit more germane.

Fine. Now we are arguing over degree of materiality. Why didn’t you just say that in the first place? Why didn’t you say, I believe Bonds should be prosecuted because he told a lie that seriously impacted an investigation? You did not make that point in the post I was responding to (and for the record, our dialogue began when you replied to a post of mine that wasn’t even directed towards you).

No, I want it to be a major strike against people lying to the authorities, giving false testimony, and obstructing justice. I want people, regardless of the nature or their testimony, to respect the law, respect the judicial process, and provide honest testimony. Why is it that people keep going back to the steriods? He lied. The subject of the lie isn't germane.

Of course the subject of the lie is germane. The investigation is about trafficking in steroids, so the subject of the lie, involving steroids, is absolutely critical.The straw man is the notion that any lie, per se, should be prosecuted.

But as I understand matters (I'll admit I haven't followed this case closely), Bonds did not deny taking steroids. He denied knowing that was what he took. Of course that is a lie, but does it really obstruct justice? Bonds testified that he took a substance given to him that can be traced back to Conte, while other evidence makes it clear the substance was a steroid. So is Bonds' lie about not knowing what the substance was really material? Does it affect the investigation? If he said he took the clear, and everyone knows what the clear is, why does the BALCO case hinge on Bonds saying he, too, knows or knew what the clear is?

Let's also keep in mind that there are many psychological factors that go into lying. As many here have pointed out or implied, Bonds probably lied in large part in an attempt to protect his legacy as one of the greatest players of all time. If several other players did not lie, might that not be in part because they didn't have any legacy to protect? Isn't it a little easier to confess doping when you haven't accomplished anything that doping could tarnish?

This is not to justify Bonds' lies. But when comparing him to people who didn't, remember that his motive to deny doping was a lot stronger than theirs.

 

[MacRoadie]

Slam Dunk?

Regardless of which way it goes, after a second day of deliberations the jury failed to return a verdict in the Bonds trial.

So much for a slam dunk...for either side.

 

[Oldman]

Juliet Macur Twitter

...and they asked to hear the replay on Friday. Monday they are comparing testimony from the transcript. Previously some forumites thought this evidence inadmissable but looks like it's being considered.

 

[flicker]

Barry'US Bonds' is going to walk, and it will be a helluva party in San Francisco.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

There are peeps and hippy lettuce NO cal dudes dancing in the streets of SBC errrrrrrr AT&T park! LMAO at anyone who thought this was a done deal for either side. "you can turn the volume up all you want to,,,, just don't touch my levels....I got them set just like I likeemm.

 

[MarkvW]

There are peeps and hippy lettuce NO cal dudes dancing in the streets of SBC errrrrrrr AT&T park! LMAO at anyone who thought this was a done deal for either side. "you can turn the volume up all you want to,,,, just don't touch my levels....I got them set just like I likeemm.

Well, you have a 50-50 chance of being correct.

 

[Zweistein]

Barry'US Bonds' is going to walk, and it will be a helluva party in San Francisco.

Not really. Barry was known as being a *** and not much was made over the fact that the Giant's had no interest in resigning him.

 

[flicker]

Not really. Barry was known as being a *** and not much was made over the fact that the Giant's had no interest in resigning him.

We know Barry and I am no longer a fan of his. I am sure he still has many fans, even if he were pronounced guilty. Plus Barry still considers himself linked to the Giant's.
I remember during the countdown towards the home run record, the headlines and excitement towards the record. I think someone who got the tying ball made $750,000 on it. I must admit I cheered and was excited when Barry went for the record, even though, I knew he was juiced.

 

[Polish]

Not really. Barry was known as being a *** and not much was made over the fact that the Giant's had no interest in resigning him.

Well, Barry WAS being a ***.
Hardly ANY fanboys back then yikes. Hater central.

But it seems like the tide has turned a bit.
Probably because of the Witch Hunt?

I have been predicting a slam dunk conviction in this trial, but now I am not so sure.

Notice that the jury is taking a bit long deliberating...
Maybe there is a fanboy or 2 amongst the haters.
Could this end up a Hung Jury?
That is what I predict in The Lance Trial BTW...hung jury
Fanboy vs Hater. Kicking and scratching in the jury room.

 

[sniper]

Well, Barry WAS being a ***.
Hardly ANY fanboys back then yikes. Hater central.

But it seems like the tide has turned a bit.
Probably because of the Witch Hunt?

I have been predicting a slam dunk conviction in this trial, but now I am not so sure.

Notice that the jury is taking a bit long deliberating...
Maybe there is a fanboy or 2 amongst the haters.
Could this end up a Hung Jury?
That is what I predict in The Lance Trial BTW...hung jury
Fanboy vs Hater. Kicking and scratching in the jury room.

what trial? i thought he didn't dope.

it seems strickland set the tone.
good to see the fanboys coming out of denial.

 

[Oldman]

Well, Barry WAS being a ***.
Hardly ANY fanboys back then yikes. Hater central.

But it seems like the tide has turned a bit.
Probably because of the Witch Hunt?

I have been predicting a slam dunk conviction in this trial, but now I am not so sure.

Notice that the jury is taking a bit long deliberating...
Maybe there is a fanboy or 2 amongst the haters.
Could this end up a Hung Jury?
That is what I predict in The Lance Trial BTW...hung jury
Fanboy vs Hater. Kicking and scratching in the jury room.

The jury could be deciding how many guilty verdicts
to supply to court with. Possible?

 

[flicker]

The jury could be deciding how many guilty verdicts
to supply to court with. Possible?

I don't care as long as it is not a hung jury, that would truly be sad.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Hung jury = waste of taxpayers' money

everyone loses except jerk BB