">
Runboard.com
You're welcome.
Please
Read Rules Click for Rules


ALL Open Forum Baseball Mules/HF's ATT Park FAQ&Admin

v

runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)


 
Giants2WorldSeries Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

HALL OF FAME POSTER
Global user

Registered: 10-2006
Posts: 1075
Reply | Quote
Barry Bonds Court Date Friday February 29th - THREAD BREAKING NEWS UPDATE:


Hopefully Barry Bonds gets good news tomorrow in his next court date. We will find out if it gets dropped or goes all the way to an actual trial date.

I am willing to bet tomorrows news will determine Barry's fate for 2008 and beyond.

If dropped he will find a team and play in 2008.

Even if it isn't dropped and they announce a trial date, if t starts after the [sign in to see URL] think he will play

If the trial date starts before the end of the 2008 season his career will be over for now.

Wish you the best [sign in to see URL]'s win this.

Last edited by Giants2WorldSeries, 2/29/2008, 2:30 pm
2/28/2008, 11:44 pm Link to this post   
 
DukeofBurgle Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

VETERAN POSTER
Global user

Registered: 02-2008
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 96
Reply | Quote
Re: Barry Bonds Court Date Friday February 29th - THREAD


I never like Barry Bonds as a person, but I can honestly say he was a lot of fun watch at the plate (not so much watching him jog after balls hit in the LF gap or jogging out ground balls).

I must say he is innocent of all crimes until proven guilty. At the same time, if he broke the law(s), justice must be served. No one is above the law, not even Barry Bonds.

Regards, Mr. Burglecutt













Last edited by DukeofBurgle, 2/29/2008, 11:02 pm


---
Sha Na Na "Duke of Earl"



2/29/2008, 12:03 am Link to this post   
 
Giants2WorldSeries Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

HALL OF FAME POSTER
Global user

Registered: 10-2006
Posts: 1075
Reply | Quote



ANYBODY HERE ANYTHING ABOUT HIM TODAY AND WHAT HAPPEN IN COURT WHEN THEY TRIED TO DROP THE CHARGES? - i haven't!
2/29/2008, 2:14 pm Link to this post   
 
Giants2WorldSeries Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

HALL OF FAME POSTER
Global user

Registered: 10-2006
Posts: 1075
Reply | Quote
Re: Barry Bonds Court Date Friday February 29th - THREAD


]Breaking News: Bonds Court Details From Friday



Last edited by Giants2WorldSeries, 2/29/2008, 2:34 pm
2/29/2008, 2:29 pm Link to this post   
 
FATALFART Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

HALL OF FAME POSTER
Global user

Registered: 11-2006
Posts: 1681
Reply | Quote



"mong those survey tests, there were 83-96 positives, Major League Baseball and the players’ union told Congress. The investigators had search warrants for only 11 players, and the union sued to have the evidence returned."

that should be fun to see!
2/29/2008, 2:33 pm Link to this post   
 
Giants2WorldSeries Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

HALL OF FAME POSTER
Global user

Registered: 10-2006
Posts: 1075
Reply | Quote



]Better Understanding

Rewrite Barry Bonds indictment, federal judge tells prosecutors
By Howard Mintz
Mercury News
Article Launched: 02/29/2008 12:51:26 PM PST

A federal judge today sent prosecutors back to the drawing board in their perjury case against against former San Francisco Giants slugger Barry Bonds.

During a hearing in federal court in San Francisco, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston agreed with Bonds' lawyers that there are flaws in the government's drafting of the charges against Bonds, who is accused of lying to a grand jury about using steroids.

The practical result of the judge's order is that the government must now rewrite its indictment against Bonds, or return to a grand jury to present a new set of specific charges that would result in a fresh indicment.

Either way, the result is that Bonds will still face a likely trial, but the case will be delayed by today's action.

Illston rejected the prosecution's argument that any potential defects in their indictment could be fixed at trial. "Why wait until trial to fix a problem?" the judge said. "Let's fix the problem now."

Lawyers for the 43-year-old Bonds filed a motion to dismiss the indictment last month, arguing that the allegations against him were so vague that he could not defend himself against them. Federal prosecutors have insisted that the indictment's allegations that Bonds lied under oath about using steroids are crystal clear.

Dennis Riordan, who argued the dismissal motion, called the government's argument a "silly position."

"What it means is that Mr. Bonds, if he faces trial, will face it on a valid indictment,"
Advertisement
Riordan said outside court.

Prosecutors declined comment on the decision. They must return to court on March 21 to let Illston know who they plan to proceed.

Meanwhile, Illston ordered the transcript of Bonds' grand jury testimony to be unsealed.

A federal grand jury indicted Bonds last November, alleging that he lied about using steroids when he testified in December 2003 before another grand jury investigating the Balco steroids scandal. Bonds has pleaded not guilty to four perjury counts and one count of obstructing justice.

The government's 10-page indictment highlighted four exchanges between Bonds and federal prosecutors who were questioning baseball's all-time home run leader about using steroids as they were probing Balco, a now-defunct Peninsula laboratory linked to the distribution of performance enhancing drugs throughout the sports world.

On numerous occasions, Bonds insisted that he did not use steroids or human growth hormone, or receive such drugs from Greg Anderson, his friend and former personal trainer. The indictment alleges that Bonds lied repeatedly about steroid use and his dealings with Anderson.

In court papers, Bonds' defense team argued that the various exchanges were vague and taken out of context, an early glimpse into a potential defense argument to a jury that the answers were open to interpretation.

Last week, Bonds' lawyers also took a shot at the government for filing court papers with a typo that suggested he'd tested positive for steroids in November 2000. The reference was meant to be to an alleged drug test in November 2001, which was previously cited in the indictment. Bonds' lawyers accused the government of inserting the mistake to inflame potential jurors, and also denied that prosecutors have "credible or admissible evidence" Bonds tested positive for steroids in 2001.

In the same court papers, defense lawyers insist that other portions of Bonds' grand jury testimony discredit the prosecution's perjury allegations. However, Illston has ordered that the testimony remain under seal.

Last edited by Giants2WorldSeries, 2/29/2008, 2:42 pm
2/29/2008, 2:34 pm Link to this post   
 
billabong2 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

HALL OF FAME POSTER
Global user

Registered: 10-2006
Location: Johannisfriedhof
Posts: 2354
Reply | Quote
Re: Barry Bonds Court Date Friday February 29th - THREAD BREAKING NEWS UPDATE:


Another solid piece by Littman, one of the few writers willing to take a critical look at this case:

[sign in to see URL];_ylt=[sign in to see URL]?slug=li-bondsdismissalhearing022908&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

SAN FRANCISCO – The judge in the Barry Bonds perjury case delivered two blows to the government Friday, ordering prosecutors to redraft “duplicitous” counts in the indictment and ordering the unsealing of Bonds’ grand jury testimony.

Hmmm, "duplicitous"?

[sign in to see URL]

marked by duplicity : deceptive in words or action

Four years in the making, and they come up with something the judge tosses right back at them and says fix this nonsense? The Bush justice department rocks. Great job guys.

Loved their solution to the problem:

The prosecutors appeared taken aback by Riordan’s audacious offer and flustered by Ilston’s skepticism. Prosecutor Douglas Wilson persisted in arguing that evidence introduced at trial would make the ambiguities and duplicity irrelevant.

Aw, come on, we'll make it less confusing and duplicitous at the trial, trust us.

“Why wait until trial to fix a problem,” she said, taking off her glasses and pressing forward. “We know what the problem is.”

Yes why? Oh, that's right it makes it easier to be duplicitous.

Before that blow had fully sunken in, she delivered a shocker. She asked whether the secrecy surrounding Bonds’ grand jury testimony made sense anymore.

“Is there any reason to continue to have it under seal?” she asked.

Wilson asked for a timeout and huddled with Matt Parrella, the lead BALCO prosecutor. “There would have to be a court order,” the junior prosecutor told Ilston.

The judge turned to the defense and with a hint of irony asked: “Do you object?”

Allen Ruby, another Bonds attorney, ambled up to the podium and smiled. Object? Of course not.


Working my way through it, and from what I see so far they better have some damning witnesses.



---
What beauty is, I know not, though it adheres to many things.
3/1/2008, 10:20 am Link to this post   
 
giantc Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

MOST VALUABLE POSTER
Global user

Registered: 07-2007
Posts: 854
Reply | Quote
Re: Barry Bonds Court Date Friday February 29th - THREAD BREAKING NEWS UPDATE:


I have read most of the testimony and it is clear the prosecutor could have cared less about BALCO while he was questioning Bonds -- they wanted to set up perjury charges all along at least [sign in to see URL]. Bonds.

The problem as I see it for the Feds, is that the prosecution really needs Anderson to flip and why would he do that now. He has shown that he will go to jail for a long time to protect Bonds. I really hope that Bonds takes care of the guy for life after this is over (even though as Bonds said I am keeping my money b/c there are not a lot rich black men).

Conte could also hurt Bonds, but he has also said that he did not know what Bonds was taking.

Of course the test results and lab results labeled BLB, BB, and Barry Bond make it pretty clear that Bonds was juicing, but his testimony over and over is that yeah I took some stuff but I never asked what it was (cream, "flaxseed oil" and pills) -- trusted my friend Greg Anderson.

The Feds also think they have proof that some of these substances were shipped to Bonds house via FedEx -- they asked question about 20 times.

The Feds also think that Bonds injected PEDs, but not sure who they are going to get to testify to that fact. The Ex Girlfried I don't think ever saw Bonds juice, but Bonds' statements to her saying he juiced are admissible evidence (statement against interest exception to the hearsay rule).

Jury may discount testimony as being the jilted ex.

3/1/2008, 10:54 am Link to this post   
 


QUICK REPLY





You are not logged in (login)

>BACK TO THE TOP<

LINKS
Retrosheet - Baseball Reference - The Baseball Cube
OFFICIAL SF Giants Board - Active Roster - 40 Man Roster
SF 2010 Schedule - SF Gate on ATT Park - KNBR Podcasts
MLB Rumors - Baseball Think Factory - Hardball Times
Fantasy Baseball Hub - Fan Graphs - Cot's Contracts
Minor Giants Daily Recap - Seat Data - SFDugout.com
AZ Giants Spring/ Fall Blog - Your Giants Korea - El Lefty Malo
Chris Haft - Huff Daddy - Inside Giants Clubhouse
McCovey Chronicles - Dodger Blues - Extra Baggs
LINKS OF FAME