See above post making sure that bit of sarcasm wasn't obvious enough. I'm not up on my smiley use.

KTVU reported is was one of the longest federal grand jury investigations in Northern California history.

The Baltimore Sun contrasted the length and return on investment to the GJ investigation into abusive priests, in a pretty interesting article.

I don't disagree with any of that, however, "all signs" point to both of them being much bigger douchebags than anyone who hasn't committed any of the crimes of either of them.

Uhh, yeah, I would expect his production to be awesome compared to most DHs actually, and he'd probably be better than last year because he doesn't have to wear himself out playing the field. Even if he hit a little worse and missed some time he'd still be a stud. Have you looked at who some teams start at DH these days?

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?

vhawk,

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

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":



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

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.

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

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.

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.

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?

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

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.

Meh, they're both named Will, and one of them used to be a women or something....right?

Easy to mistake them.

I think you are thinking of Christina Kahrl, another BP writer.

/edit and its the other way around, she used to be he.

How is MFW being misleading, though? He didn't write about a failed test in 2000, and now states that evidence of a failed test in 2000 is "previously undisclosed". If the leaked transcript contained evidence of a failed test in 2000, why wouldn't he write about it in the book?

Then call me an idiot (everyone else has) since I am saying otherwise. The press is not under an obligation to keep grand jury testimony secret. The grand jurors and attorneys are the only under that obligation. In fact, the witness is generally permitted to walk out of the grand jury room and recite precisely what he told the grand jury.

Hiding information from an investigation to avoid prosecution of yourself or others is obstruction of justice.

Lying to mislead an investigation is obstruction of justice.

The publication of the information did not hinder the investigation in a material way and was not intended to obstruct the investigation.

Refusing to identify the leak is contempt (not obstruction) and they were held in contempt. You can always be quiet -- sometimes the law protects your silence (Fifth Amendment) and sometimes it does not (contempt). If Bonds had not been granted immunity, he would have had the right to remain silent. With immunity, he could have refused to answer and been held in contempt. By answering and answering untruthfully he committed perjury and possibly obstructed justice.

seriously?

See here.

Umm...he lied to federal agents during a federal investigation with the sole purpose of avoiding prosecution? The fact that his fraud failed doesn't make it any less fradulent or criminal. It's hardly the laws fault that he's an ineffective and stupid criminal. Smart 'roid mongers pull a McGwire and refuse to answer any questions or participate in the process.

Wow. You have every fact incorrect. Read the entire thread (and maybe some of the news stories) and try again. Start with this: Bonds is being prosecuted for lying to the grand jury not federal agents and he did not lie to avoid prosecution because he had immunity from prosecution for anything that he said. He didn't commit fraud and he is not accused of fraud, he probably did lie and he is being prosecuted for that.

Bonds may very well have obstructed justice, but not for any of the reasons you say.

Seems like six of one, half a dozen of the other to me. I appreciate the legal distinction, but in reality, seems like they could be charged with either one. I'm not saying they committed a crime by publishing it, I'm saying they solicited and conspired towards a crime in obtaining the information. They actively pursued a leak that they knew to be in violation of the law, and used it for profit.

If conspiring in secret to obtain testimony illegally isn't obstruction, isn't it conspiracy to obstruct or something? I mean it's clearly more than contempt. Contempt would be if it just fell into their laps and they said, "Naw, sorry, can't help ya."

Again IANAL but to me it seems like people are ignoring the fact that soliciting and conspiring to commit a crime are, well, against the law, and they're not merely contempt.

NT,

HOPE THIS HELPS YOU MORON

thayer,

if only i had a brain