Barry Bonds Adds Convicted Felon To His Resume

[tp49]

Surprised no one mentioned this earlier but Barry Bonds can now add convicted felon to his list of accomplishments.

Full article from the San Francisco Chronicle here. Roger Clemens can't be too far behind.

Barry Bonds, the former Giants outfielder and baseball's all-time home-run leader, was convicted Wednesday of obstruction of justice for giving evasive answers to a federal grand jury that questioned him about his use of performance-enhancing drugs.

The jury that convicted Bonds in federal court in San Francisco deadlocked on three perjury charges. U.S. District Judge Susan Illston declared a mistrial on those counts.

The jury returned its verdict after a three-week trial. The panel began its deliberations Friday.

Illston set a May 20 hearing, in part to determine whether the government wants a retrial on the perjury counts. Bonds' lawyer, Allen Ruby, said the defense will ask the judge to throw out the verdict, saying a conviction for obstruction was inconsistent with the jury's deadlock on the perjury counts.

The lone conviction came on a count charging Bonds with intentionally giving evasive, false or misleading testimony. In response to a question about whether his trainer gave him injectable drugs, Bonds gave a rambling answer, saying he was a "celebrity child, not just in baseball, by my own instincts."

Deliberate interference

Bonds' answer was obstruction of justice, the jury ruled, a deliberate attempt to interfere with the grand jury's probe.

Bonds, 46, showed no reaction to the verdict. He left court without saying anything. A sentencing date was not set, and Bonds remains free. He could be sentenced to two years in prison under federal guidelines, although some legal experts say he is likely to receive no more than house arrest.

U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag said the trial was about truth and justice.

"In the United States, taking an oath and promising to testify truthfully is a serious matter," she said in a statement. "We cannot ignore those who choose instead to obstruct justice."

Outside court, jurors said they unanimously believed Bonds was deliberately evasive in response to questions about whether he had ever been injected with banned drugs.

They deadlocked 11-1 in favor of convicting Bonds on a perjury charge based on Bonds' claims that he had never received an injection from anyone other than his physician.

Jurors said they deadlocked in favor of acquittal on the other two perjury charges, which were based on Bonds' denials that he had knowingly used steroids and human growth hormone.

[crashcarson15]

Roger Clemens can't be too far behind.

Although, I don't think he'll get off with as little as Bonds has, simply because McNamee is going to testify when Anderson didn't in the Bonds case.

[TFoA]

I think I heard that he's gonna get fined less for Obstruction of Justice than Kobe Bryant did for his gay slur the other day. And I've also heard that there's a pretty small chance that there's gonna be a retrial when it comes to the perjury charges...so yeah, holy , Bonds got off. That being said, as if we needed any more proof that Bonds was on the juice, that OoJ charge pretty much cinches it.

And yeah, Clemens is probably gonna get it worse.

[FiddySicks]

I think I heard that he's gonna get fined less for Obstruction of Justice than Kobe Bryant did for his gay slur the other day. And I've also heard that there's a pretty small chance that there's gonna be a retrial when it comes to the perjury charges...so yeah, holy , Bonds got off. That being said, as if we needed any more proof that Bonds was on the juice, that OoJ charge pretty much cinches it.

And yeah, Clemens is probably gonna get it worse.

How? He was aquitted of the charges of lying about taking steroids and HGH. He was hit with the obstruction charge for meandering around the questions with his explanation of how he was a celebrity child. If you really want to take the Obstruction charge as absolute proof that he knowingly was on the juice, then it sounds like any outcome would've brought you to the same conclusion.

And I'm not even defending Bonds. He probably did knowingly use steroids. But the hate and prejudice against this guy is almost cavalier fan like. It's petty and worthless. The guy is out of baseball because no team wants him, he'll pay a marginal fine for the conviction, then move on to enjoy his fortune. This outcome doesn't change a damn thing. Bonds is still worth millions, he still hit the baseball over the fence more than anyone else in American pro baseball (no matter the "integrity" of how he got there), and he's still probably going to be as big of a dick now as he was then. Nobody "got" Bonds with this one at all. It was nothing but an enormous waste of time, energy, and money.

[CS85]

Agreed buc. This trial should come up first if you google search "massive waste of time and money." None of this matters - if you want to punish him, don't put him in jail, just strip him of his dignity: strip him of his records and informally ban him from the game via exile.

[Gothamite]

Wait, why shouldn't we put him in jail? He broke the law and was convicted.

[rangerfan94]

I will comment on this later. That said, was everyone in the MLB Police Force BLIND when the chase for 61 was on? Sosa, Mac. It didnt dawn on anyone that these guys were looking a little bigger, hitting the ball farther? Acne on Macs face? NO. All were in happyland fans,TV,ETC, on the chase for the record. Ratings were up, Mac was a hero and look where Baseball is now. NOW a player can quit the game after being tested. This is all BULL that has gone on long enough.

[dfwabel]

I think I heard that he's gonna get fined less for Obstruction of Justice than Kobe Bryant did for his gay slur the other day. And I've also heard that there's a pretty small chance that there's gonna be a retrial when it comes to the perjury charges...so yeah, holy , Bonds got off. That being said, as if we needed any more proof that Bonds was on the juice, that OoJ charge pretty much cinches it.

And yeah, Clemens is probably gonna get it worse.

How? He was aquitted of the charges of lying about taking steroids and HGH. He was hit with the obstruction charge for meandering around the questions with his explanation of how he was a celebrity child. If you really want to take the Obstruction charge as absolute proof that he knowingly was on the juice, then it sounds like any outcome would've brought you to the same conclusion.

And I'm not even defending Bonds. He probably did knowingly use steroids. But the hate and prejudice against this guy is almost cavalier fan like. It's petty and worthless. The guy is out of baseball because no team wants him, he'll pay a marginal fine for the conviction, then move on to enjoy his fortune. This outcome doesn't change a damn thing. Bonds is still worth millions, he still hit the baseball over the fence more than anyone else in American pro baseball (no matter the "integrity" of how he got there), and he's still probably going to be as big of a dick now as he was then. Nobody "got" Bonds with this one at all. It was nothing but an enormous waste of time, energy, and money.

1- He was not acquitted of the three charges, the jury was deadlocked/hung on three other charges. If he was acquitted, then the Justice Department could not bring the case to Court by law. A deadlocked jury provides the Justice Department to ask for a new trail on the same three charges. It is not "Double Jeopardy".

2- The OOJ was a result from his Grand Jury testimony years ago and how that even though Greg Anderson did not testify in this trial, Jeremy/Jeff Giambi and Marvin Bernard took the stand this year to say that they received PEDs from Greg Anderson. Bonds told the Grand Jury he did not know the "cream & clear" were PEDs yet others connected to Anderson knew they were.

Full Disclosure: I have ordered products from the "new" BALCO twice after I ordered a free sample in 2008. They are OK in terms of sport performance, but nothing special or they know that they will not pass a current urine test.

3-The fact that this case is seven years old proves that people do not care. What they may care about is that the all-time hit leader, all-time HR leader, and best pitcher in the last 50 years will not get in for some "violation" (PEDs or gambling).

EDIT: 4-Bonds still has an appeal process which he can go through. Now, Bonds has already paid for seven years of "billable attorney hours" on this case and even with his former salaries, that is steep. That is a lot of money. Even after earning $188M, in MLB salary, he has been divorced twice. AKA he has not worked for a bit.

[Gothamite]

I will comment on this later. That said, was everyone in the MLB Police Force BLIND when the chase for 61 was on? Sosa, Mac. It didnt dawn on anyone that these guys were looking a little bigger, hitting the ball farther? Acne on Macs face? NO. All were in happyland fans,TV,ETC, on the chase for the record. Ratings were up, Mac was a hero and look where Baseball is now. NOW a player can quit the game after being tested. This is all BULL that has gone on long enough.

In fairness, MLB wasn't unable to test at the time, under the CBA. Of course they suspected, but in the absence of any proof, they couldn't really say anything.

So they were faced with a pretty tough choice - embrace the moment, or stand off as sour killjoys, announcing to the world the conviction that their most high-profile players were cheating, without any evidence at all (and at the same time, potentially being in violation of their contract with the union). Can you really blame them for embracing it at the time?

[rangerfan94]

I will comment on this later. That said, was everyone in the MLB Police Force BLIND when the chase for 61 was on? Sosa, Mac. It didnt dawn on anyone that these guys were looking a little bigger, hitting the ball farther? Acne on Macs face? NO. All were in happyland fans,TV,ETC, on the chase for the record. Ratings were up, Mac was a hero and look where Baseball is now. NOW a player can quit the game after being tested. This is all BULL that has gone on long enough.

In fairness, MLB wasn't unable to test at the time, under the CBA. Of course they suspected, but in the absence of any proof, they couldn't really say anything.

So they were faced with a pretty tough choice - embrace the moment, or stand off as sour killjoys, announcing to the world the conviction that their most high-profile players were cheating, without any evidence at all (and at the same time, potentially being in violation of their contract with the union). Can you really blame them for embracing it at the time?

No I cant. I understand.

[Saintsfan]

I've been thinking about this whole case for a while, and aside from a washout judgement what have we got? We still seem to be in the 'Well obviously there were MLB players who were juiced up, but we don't have proof, and we don't know how prevalent it was' kind of no mans land in these discussions. The problem to me is that if there was a high percentage of players on 'roids, that, whilst not excusing those who were on them, it adds a different focus to their achievements. If only a few players were popping pills, or injecting or whatever, that makes the case for expunging those players and there records from the books somewhat stronger (though with the same riders about not being able to erase history etc).

[pmoehrin]

With regards to the Hall of Fame I just assume everyone was using and don't hold it against anyone that did during the late 90'-early 2000's. I don't think Jose Canseco's assertion that 85% of players were using is very far off. People who you would never even think of were using. And I'm almost certain there are already guys in the baseball HOF that used steroids during their career.

I think the guys who did use like McGwire and Sosa have gotten kind of a raw deal in recent years. They were glorified for their performances in the '98 season, despite they're being evidence at least with McGwire that it wasn't completely on the level. And then have the same fans and reporters turn around on them a few years later and say that really wasn't the right thing to do. I'm not saying what they did was right, but I'm not going to listen to the hypocrites that made these people tell me how terrible they were. You can blame Bud Selig and the players union all you want, and they certainly catch part of the blame. But nobody wanted to talk about it when it was a problem and anyone who did was silenced.

I think you just take it for what the era was. PED's are here to stay. Should we bring down the hammer everytime someone is caught and ban them for life? It may be the morally right move to do, but I don't think its very realistic. I don't have an answer for what to do, but I'm more in favor of what the MLB does now, then how the media and most fans handle it.

[Gothamite]

I've been thinking about this whole case for a while, and aside from a washout judgement what have we got? We still seem to be in the 'Well obviously there were MLB players who were juiced up, but we don't have proof, and we don't know how prevalent it was' kind of no mans land in these discussions. The problem to me is that if there was a high percentage of players on 'roids, that, whilst not excusing those who were on them, it adds a different focus to their achievements. If only a few players were popping pills, or injecting or whatever, that makes the case for expunging those players and there records from the books somewhat stronger (though with the same riders about not being able to erase history etc).

I think you're asking a lot of one court case. This suit wasn't about sorting out an entire era. It was about one single perjurer.

There were two things "we got" from this case - barring appeals, Bonds will be punished for his crime by serving some time in jail. And other people might be less inclined to do the same. While not as emotionally satisfying as a conviction on all charges might have been (and might still be), this is still a win-win.

[pmoehrin]

I've been thinking about this whole case for a while, and aside from a washout judgement what have we got? We still seem to be in the 'Well obviously there were MLB players who were juiced up, but we don't have proof, and we don't know how prevalent it was' kind of no mans land in these discussions. The problem to me is that if there was a high percentage of players on 'roids, that, whilst not excusing those who were on them, it adds a different focus to their achievements. If only a few players were popping pills, or injecting or whatever, that makes the case for expunging those players and there records from the books somewhat stronger (though with the same riders about not being able to erase history etc).

I think you're asking a lot of one court case. This suit wasn't about sorting out an entire era. It was about one single perjurer.

There were two things "we got" from this case - barring appeals, Bonds will be punished for his crime by serving some time in jail. And other people might be less inclined to do the same. While not as emotionally satisfying as a conviction on all charges might have been (and might still be), this is still a win-win.

I defintely agree that what Bonds is going through now is a completely seperate issue then Barry Bonds just using steroids.

Bonds almost certainly lied under oath. Doesen't matter what it was for. The entire legal system is built on people telling the truth. If somebody feels like they are somehow above that, they need to be taken down.

I said before I had sympathy for McGwire and Sosa for what they are going through now, but I don't have much for Bonds and Clemens. The fact they went out of their way to cover it up with a complete disregard for the US legal system, brought it to another level for me.

[Saintsfan]

I've been thinking about this whole case for a while, and aside from a washout judgement what have we got? We still seem to be in the 'Well obviously there were MLB players who were juiced up, but we don't have proof, and we don't know how prevalent it was' kind of no mans land in these discussions. The problem to me is that if there was a high percentage of players on 'roids, that, whilst not excusing those who were on them, it adds a different focus to their achievements. If only a few players were popping pills, or injecting or whatever, that makes the case for expunging those players and there records from the books somewhat stronger (though with the same riders about not being able to erase history etc).

I think you're asking a lot of one court case. This suit wasn't about sorting out an entire era. It was about one single perjurer.

There were two things "we got" from this case - barring appeals, Bonds will be punished for his crime by serving some time in jail. And other people might be less inclined to do the same. While not as emotionally satisfying as a conviction on all charges might have been (and might still be), this is still a win-win.

Well that's true enough, but the whole thing seems like a circus for little reason without a judgement on the drugs part of the case.

[bosrs1]

Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy...

[FiddySicks]

I've been thinking about this whole case for a while, and aside from a washout judgement what have we got? We still seem to be in the 'Well obviously there were MLB players who were juiced up, but we don't have proof, and we don't know how prevalent it was' kind of no mans land in these discussions. The problem to me is that if there was a high percentage of players on 'roids, that, whilst not excusing those who were on them, it adds a different focus to their achievements. If only a few players were popping pills, or injecting or whatever, that makes the case for expunging those players and there records from the books somewhat stronger (though with the same riders about not being able to erase history etc).

I think you're asking a lot of one court case. This suit wasn't about sorting out an entire era. It was about one single perjurer.

There were two things "we got" from this case - barring appeals, Bonds will be punished for his crime by serving some time in jail. And other people might be less inclined to do the same. While not as emotionally satisfying as a conviction on all charges might have been (and might still be), this is still a win-win.

Unless things have changed in the past few days, that's probably not true. In the end, Kobe will probably end up paying a bigger fine for calling the ref a :censored:ing f*g the other day.

And on the issue of it not being "emotionally satisfying", well, that's not the point. The fact that people want this guy convicted and tossed in jail because he was a dick contradicts the the whole point of the US legal system from the very start by completely ignoring the idea of reason free from passion. It's not reasonable to convict someone of a crime and sentence them accordingly because of ones own emotions.

[Gothamite]

My reading is that he's likely to serve a short sentence in Club Fed. Sure, other BALCO people were let off with probation, but they obviously want to send a message with Bonds.

The maximum sentence ten years. I don't think that's remotely possible, but I do think he's in for a short stint.

[Saintsfan]

I've been thinking about this whole case for a while, and aside from a washout judgement what have we got? We still seem to be in the 'Well obviously there were MLB players who were juiced up, but we don't have proof, and we don't know how prevalent it was' kind of no mans land in these discussions. The problem to me is that if there was a high percentage of players on 'roids, that, whilst not excusing those who were on them, it adds a different focus to their achievements. If only a few players were popping pills, or injecting or whatever, that makes the case for expunging those players and there records from the books somewhat stronger (though with the same riders about not being able to erase history etc).

I think you're asking a lot of one court case. This suit wasn't about sorting out an entire era. It was about one single perjurer.

There were two things "we got" from this case - barring appeals, Bonds will be punished for his crime by serving some time in jail. And other people might be less inclined to do the same. While not as emotionally satisfying as a conviction on all charges might have been (and might still be), this is still a win-win.

Unless things have changed in the past few days, that's probably not true. In the end, Kobe will probably end up paying a bigger fine for calling the ref a :censored:ing f*g the other day.

And on the issue of it not being "emotionally satisfying", well, that's not the point. The fact that people want this guy convicted and tossed in jail because he was a dick contradicts the the whole point of the US legal system from the very start by completely ignoring the idea of reason free from passion. It's not reasonable to convict someone of a crime and sentence them accordingly because of ones own emotions.

It's not about emotion, it's about getting sone handle on how widespread drug usage was in baseball. Now that might be tough to answer, ever, but to an extent hats what I want to find out from these trials. Frankly, I could care less about Bonds or Clemens and what happens to them.

[Gothamite]

I want to know the extent too, but a trial isn't the appropriate venue. We were never going to learn that from the Bonds trial. Frankly, you should care about what happens to Bonds personally, because his stonewalling and lying, and the same from others like him, is the reason we don't know more about the extent of steroid use.

And as for this trial, you can't expect the proceeding to fulfil unrealistic expectations. A murder trial is not the place to learn about homicide rates. That was the other one, you know- the one where Bonds lied.

You want to learn about the extent of steroid use? Hope Bonds does time. Then maybe next time Clemens will tell the truth, Palmeiro will tell the truth, and we might actually start to learn something.