Bonds could be indicted by grand jury soon
Michigan
Posts: 4,942 ✭
in Sports Talk
According to a report in the New York Daily News, several sources within Major League Baseball expect a San Francisco grand jury to indict Giants slugger Barry Bonds, possibly even as early as next week.
The senior sources said they have no inside information, but expect Bonds to be indicted before the grand jury that has been hearing evidence against him expires within the next couple of weeks.
Several sources within MLB said they found plenty of damning information about Bonds in their own investigation, launched secretly a year before commissioner Bud Selig appointed former U.S. Senator George Mitchell in March to head an MLB inquiry into steroid use.
Bonds faces possible indictment for perjury and tax evasion. When he appeared before a grand jury in December 2003, Bonds testified that he did not knowingly take performance-enhancing drugs.
While Bonds' friend and personal trainer Greg Anderson (one of four men convicted in the BALCO steroid trafficking case) has not testified before the grand jury, earning him a contempt of court charge and a stint in prison without bail, several other key witnesses have done so. Included among them were Bonds' former physician Arthur Ting, Giants trainer Stan Conte and Bonds' former mistress Kimberly Bell.
Bell reportedly testified that Bonds gave her about $80,000 in possibly undeclared cash and admitted to her that he used anabolic steroids before he was introduced to BALCO.
The senior sources said they have no inside information, but expect Bonds to be indicted before the grand jury that has been hearing evidence against him expires within the next couple of weeks.
Several sources within MLB said they found plenty of damning information about Bonds in their own investigation, launched secretly a year before commissioner Bud Selig appointed former U.S. Senator George Mitchell in March to head an MLB inquiry into steroid use.
Bonds faces possible indictment for perjury and tax evasion. When he appeared before a grand jury in December 2003, Bonds testified that he did not knowingly take performance-enhancing drugs.
While Bonds' friend and personal trainer Greg Anderson (one of four men convicted in the BALCO steroid trafficking case) has not testified before the grand jury, earning him a contempt of court charge and a stint in prison without bail, several other key witnesses have done so. Included among them were Bonds' former physician Arthur Ting, Giants trainer Stan Conte and Bonds' former mistress Kimberly Bell.
Bell reportedly testified that Bonds gave her about $80,000 in possibly undeclared cash and admitted to her that he used anabolic steroids before he was introduced to BALCO.
0
Comments
we have a war going on over in Iraq
we have kids dying everyday from a drug called meth.
but all congress seems to care about is if Bonds took Roids! Give me a F___ing break! leave the guy alone.
if you want to clean up the streets start with the coke heroin meth.. i dont think kids are dying from roids(not saying roids are good for you). those other drugs i mentioned are far more of a worry for parents.
<< <i>Couldn't he theoretically take the 5th amednment, and not face any jail time for obstruction like his trainer did? >>
Of course Bonds could invoke his 5th amendment right. If indicted, Bonds would be a criminal defendant a real criminal trial. Criminal defendants are never forced to talk.
<< <i>Does anyone else find it just plain weird? That we have a crazy guy over in korea with nukes and maybe the capability of reaching us with them.
we have a war going on over in Iraq
we have kids dying everyday from a drug called meth.
but all congress seems to care about is if Bonds took Roids! Give me a F___ing break! leave the guy alone.
if you want to clean up the streets start with the coke heroin meth.. i dont think kids are dying from roids(not saying roids are good for you). those other drugs i mentioned are far more of a worry for parents. >>
What does Congress have to do with this? They aren't conducting the grand jury investigation.
And even if they were, it's called MULTI-TASKING
<< <i>Couldn't he theoretically take the 5th amednment, and not face any jail time for obstruction like his trainer did? >>
Wow, what a statement.
Take the 5th, of course.
Avoid jail time because of it? What in God's name are you talking about? He would be acquitted for not testifying?
Jeez, that would mean we never convicted anyone.
He certainly could be convicted, even if taking the 5th.
It's a perjury charge. It's probably better if he does not testify. The prosecution could just cut up his testimony and show a tendency to lie under oath.
<< <i>
<< <i>Couldn't he theoretically take the 5th amednment, and not face any jail time for obstruction like his trainer did? >>
Wow, what a statement.
Take the 5th, of course.
Avoid jail time because of it? What in God's name are you talking about? He would be acquitted for not testifying?
Jeez, that would mean we never convicted anyone.
He certainly could be convicted, even if taking the 5th.
It's a perjury charge. It's probably better if he does not testify. The prosecution could just cut up his testimony and show a tendency to lie under oath. >>
Ignorance is bliss
Keep in mind that he doesn't comprehend the concept of anti-trust, so this shouldn't be surprising.
You could indict a ham sammich
?
LOL
<< <i>ever heard the saying...
You could indict a ham sammich
? >>
...but you can't make it testify.
Edit:
I just can't resist.
Who backs up the catcher on a play at the plate? Certainly not the shortstop.
<< <i> Couldn't he theoretically take the 5th amednment, >>
Invariably it's "amendment."
If congress wants to investigate anything, try investigating major league baseball officials and team owners, because if anyone thinks that the league, commish and owners havnt known 100% about the steroid use for years they are very naive. These guys from the top on down have known about it and turned a blind eye because they were making money. Plain and simple. They knew about it in 98 when McGwire and Sosa were raking in dough all over the place, they probably knew long before that, and they certainly have known since.
In 20 years the only one that will be looked at with any respect out of this will be Canseco for telling it like it is and bringing the whole thing out in the open.
-- Yogi Berra
People that evade taxes should not be excused...that's just me.
<< <i>This is all most definately garbage. Like others said, spend time with issues that matter to America.
>>
Tax evasion is a serious crime and should be punished.
It is an "issue that matters to America."
<< <i>Wow, what a statement.
Take the 5th, of course.
Avoid jail time because of it? What in God's name are you talking about? He would be acquitted for not testifying?
>>
Did I say that? I said that in obvious reference to his trainer who refused to testify and went to jail because of it. Bonds wouldn't go to jail for not testifying.
<< <i>Jeez, that would mean we never convicted anyone. >>
Again, I was saying he couldn't be convicted for obstruction like his trainer was.
<< <i>He certainly could be convicted, even if taking the 5th. >>
Of course he could. No one was arguing otherwise.
<< <i>It's a perjury charge. It's probably better if he does not testify. The prosecution could just cut up his testimony and show a tendency to lie under oath. >>
And the whole 'I didn't know what it was!' crap he pulled in the BALCO case wouldn't fly here.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Yes you did. Being an English professor you should know that. you ended the sentence with a question mark.
Couldn't HE.................not face jail time, like his trainer did?
Steve
ohh i forgot.... put bonds in jail and we all save money? sorry guys i cant get pass this fact! that this is a bunch of bullsh$$$$$$$t
perkdog thanks for agreeing with me on this! (spelling once gain this isnt english class)!!
I forgot big mac sosa palmeiro etc... bunch of names we can all make up! did ROIDS ALSO! im not a bonds fan at all but i think its BS!
wow selig thinks bonds was the only guy?????
WHEN DO MY COWBOYS BEAT UP ON PHILLY ANYWAY? TOTOTOTOTOTOTOTOTOTOTOTOTOTO
Think about it, Canseco basically broke the news after being black-balled from the league, and why was he black-balled? Are you going to tell me, his last year with the White Sox, 16 HRs and 49 RBIs in 76 games, is bad? His last game was in that infamous 2001 season. Sure, he did not match up to his earlier big years, but he was not that bad if you look at production. And also, do not tell me that he was black-balled for having a ball bounce off his head for a homer either! Just sit and watch, it is only the beginning!!!!!!!!
<< <i>gas prices are 2.98 in atlanta?????? bonds took roids WOW! ok life goes on! how do we get gas prices back down?
ohh i forgot.... put bonds in jail and we all save money? sorry guys i cant get pass this fact! that this is a bunch of bullsh$$$$$$$t
>>
Uh, since when did JUSTICE have anything to do with saving YOU money? The possible indictments have nothing to do with 'roids. It has everything to do with Tax Evasion and Perjury.
Ax -
The topic is the indictment which is the product of the grand jury.
Your reference, in keeping with the topic asked about his possible action during the trial, not grand jury testimony.
If you had referenced the current grand jury proceedings, this would have been my reply -
He most likely will not be called to testify before this grand jury as he was in the other. It's a proceeding controlled by the prosecution in order to get an indictment passed up to the court. The subject of the indictment (Bonds) would probably not be called to testify. The subject in the previous grand jury was Balco and it's people, not Bonds.
Either way, you are off base.
<< <i>Not to turn this down a political road, but how is Bonds gonna face perjury charges for doing the same thing that Bill Clinton did? I guess the courts can pick and choose who's allowed to commit perjury and who's not. This is all starting to seem like a witch-hunt but I can understand why they are doing it. Steroids WILL become a major problem in this country with teenage boys if they don't nip it now. Young men are generally obsessed with looks, muscles, etc.. and they need to be taught that steroids aren't the answer. >>
You don't lie to a Federal Grand Jury, period.
You don't evade paying your taxes, period.
These are two things that are HUGE no-nos in America; always has been, always will be. You do them both and get caught, you are going to jail regardless of "who" you are.
<< <i>Did I say that?
Yes you did. Being an English professor you should know that. you ended the sentence with a question mark.
Couldn't HE.................not face jail time, like his trainer did? >>
You are leaving a KEY part of my question out, which is the crux of my post: 'for obstruction'.
Convenient of you to skip that part.
I asked that he'd avoid jail time for OBSTRUCTION, not for the charges against him, by pleading the not testifying.
I'll be the first to call bull on that statement, and I am not cleaning your toes either ...
Hopefully Bonds gets nailed. Baseball fans know that he is guilty and now that MLB is finally stepping up to the plate to get this guy, fans will most likely have a reinforced belief that the game is becoming clean.
Mark Mulder rookies
Chipper Jones rookies
Orlando Cabrera rookies
Lawrence Taylor
Sam Huff
Lavar Arrington
NY Giants
NY Yankees
NJ Nets
NJ Devils
1950s-1960s Topps NY Giants Team cards
Looking for Topps rookies as well.
References:
GregM13
VintageJeff
<< <i>Not to turn this down a political road, but how is Bonds gonna face perjury charges for doing the same thing that Bill Clinton did? I guess the courts can pick and choose who's allowed to commit perjury and who's not. This is all starting to seem like a witch-hunt but I can understand why they are doing it. Steroids WILL become a major problem in this country with teenage boys if they don't nip it now. Young men are generally obsessed with looks, muscles, etc.. and they need to be taught that steroids aren't the answer. >>
Uh..Clinton DID face perjury charges. That's what the impeachment hearings were all about.
And it's the prosecutor, not the courts, who decides whether to charge or not.
<< <i>If Bonds goes down, you can better believe, baseball will go down with it.
I'll be the first to call bull on that statement, and I am not cleaning your toes either ...
Hopefully Bonds gets nailed. Baseball fans know that he is guilty and now that MLB is finally stepping up to the plate to get this guy, fans will most likely have a reinforced belief that the game is becoming clean. >>
What I meant by baseball going down is, shall Bonds go down, then something will come out about how the owners, management, and probably many in the league offices were knowing 100% of the goings on. Not everyone may have known, but quite a few I can guarantee knew everything. I heard an ex-friend and ex-girlfriend of Bonds are going to perhaps testify. Let us look at this, a woman who is PO'ed at Bonds, and a past friend who Bonds said was stealing money from him and forging his name. They sure look like quality witnesses in my book! And also, the game will never be clean, chemistry will get better, drugs will get "cleaner!"
yeah so? the whole point was that you said one thing, then when you were shown to be wrong (as usual) you spun a different tale.
You said: If he pleads the 5th he can avoid jail time.
then you came on and said you didn't say that.
Bottom line is you did.
end of story
Steve
<< <i>ou are leaving a KEY part of my question out, which is the crux of my post: 'for obstruction'.
yeah so? the whole point was that you said one thing, then when you were shown to be wrong (as usual) you spun a different tale
You said: If he pleads the 5th he can avoid jail time.
then you came on and said you didn't say that.
Bottom line is you did.
end of story
Steve >>
You're an absolute MORON, WP.
I said 'avoid jail time for obstruction' you simple minded idiot.
You can't take quotes out of context and expect to be taken seriously you dolt.
I can tell you know you are wrong as you start with the name calling. whenever you are wrong (which is almost always) you wind up calling people names.
It is a character flaw you have.
so I can't be accused of misquoting you, you said:
Couldn't he theoretically take the 5th amednment, and not face any jail time for obstruction like his trainer did?
And tha means (regardless of what you now want to say) simply if he takes the 5th can he avoid jail time. It was then expalined to you that regardless of the charge pleading the 5th does not in and of itself spare anyone jailtime. regardless of the charge.
of course being the arrogant ripck that you are you would rather spin that all away then simply say: ok, I understand.
Now take a hike.
Steve
I can't? jeese that is exactly what you do all the freaking time!
Steve
<< <i>
so I can't be accused of misquoting you, you said:
Couldn't he theoretically take the 5th amednment, and not face any jail time for obstruction like his trainer did?
And tha means (regardless of what you now want to say) simply if he takes the 5th can he avoid jail time. It was then expalined to you that regardless of the charge pleading the 5th does not in and of itself spare anyone jailtime. regardless of the charge.
of course being the arrogant ripck that you are you would rather spin that all away then simply say: ok, I understand.
Now take a hike.
Steve >>
Face jail time FOR OBSTRUCTION.
I didn't say he'd miss jail time, I said he wouldn't serve it like his trainer did.
Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend? Are you that dense? As far as the others, they are simply not reading the quote, and going with others are saying.
Hmm are you circumventing the bad word filter? Stown's gonna get you!!!
Anyhoo...
As I said earlier, if it's proven that Bonds lied during a Federal Grand Jury testimony AND evaded paying taxes, he will be serving jail time.
It goes w/o saying that if a person takes the 5th they can't be charged with obstruction.
I merely was twisting what he said to fit my needs. sorta like he does to everyone here.
Steve
No you weren't playing, you truly are an idiot.
Stown, how many quotes are you going to load up in your signature line? You look desperate, you know that, right?
<< <i>
<< <i>Did I say that?
Yes you did. Being an English professor you should know that. you ended the sentence with a question mark.
Couldn't HE.................not face jail time, like his trainer did? >>
You are leaving a KEY part of my question out, which is the crux of my post: 'for obstruction'.
Convenient of you to skip that part.
I asked that he'd avoid jail time for OBSTRUCTION, not for the charges against him, by pleading the not testifying. >>
Two possibilities here depending on which way you choose to spin your lack of understanding.
Grand Jury - Again, Bonds will not be called to testify to this Grand Jury. He is the subject. If he was called and refused to testify then he could be charged with obstruction, but this just will not happen.
Trial - The accused has a right to plead the 5th and not be charged with obstruction.
Once again, the topic is the indictment which follows the Grand Jury proceeding, not Grand Jury testimony.
Asking about obstruction is a senseless question.
Now spin it.
Damn guys why does everything have to be such drama? You all act like a bunch of immature kids.
<< <i>There's nothing to spin. I made a simple statement that I thought was clear. Anderson (Bonds' trainer) got a lot of press for going to jail for refusing to testify...I simply pointed out that (a) Bonds wouldn't be testifying and (b) he wouldn't see jail time for not testifying.
Damn guys why does everything have to be such drama? You all act like a bunch of immature kids. >>
Your statement was wrong. In fact you did not make a statement. It was a question about avoiding jail time after being charged with obstruction just like his trainer.
Several people challenged it.
As usual you attempted damage control. Your quote above is another meager attempt and in fact completely false - reference your original post which was a question, no facts were given.
To refresh your memory -
<< <i> Couldn't he theoretically take the 5th amednment, and not face any jail time for obstruction like his trainer did? >>
We like to poke the monkey with a sharp stick.
<< <i>WP-
No you weren't playing, you truly are an idiot.
Stown, how many quotes are you going to load up in your signature line? You look desperate, you know that, right? >>
You really should see someone about that name calling problem you have there.
I look desperate? Per your sig line, "Should Stown be permanently banned? PM me." Now why, oh why, would you want me banned? Because you get owned time and time again and proven wrong over and over? How's that amature petition coming along, by the way? Obviously, it's still falling upon deaf ears because I'm still right here
<< <i>
You really should see someone about that name calling problem you have there. >>
It's not name calling when it's the truth.
<< <i>I look desperate? Per your sig line, "Should Stown be permanently banned? PM me." Now why, oh why, would you want me banned? Because you get owned time and time again and proven wrong over and over? How's that amature petition coming along, by the way? Obviously, it's still falling upon deaf ears because I'm still right here
And yes, you look absolutely desperate in your attention grab quoting me. Keep it up though, I am glad my words inspire you.
<< <i>And yes, you look absolutely desperate in your attention grab quoting me. Keep it up though, I am glad my words inspire you. >>
I look desperate? Per your sig line, "Should Stown be permanently banned? PM me." Now why, oh why, would you want me banned? Because you get owned time and time again and proven wrong over and over? How's that amature petition coming along, by the way? Obviously, it's still falling upon deaf ears because I'm still right here
Exactly my point.
The original poster made no reference to that. what he said was:
Bonds faces possible indictment for perjury and tax evasion. When he appeared before a grand jury in December 2003, Bonds testified that he did not knowingly take performance-enhancing drugs.
How you got to asking a theoretical QUESTION from that regarding obstruction was the idiocy here.
Steve
perhaps you should look in the mirror. maybe if you acted more civil here, people would not be so quick to poke you with a stick.
Steve
You got your ass handed to you on the OF, you went so far as to delete your posts there (coward), and you run you mouth here.
Go home.
like i said yesterday, coin and I both agreed that you are an idiot and not worth fighting over. I deleted my posts there so I wouldn't look like you do here everyday.
stay on topic, the posts I deleted over there have nothing to do with this topic.
more proof you are the derailer of threads.
Steve
<< <i>Nice attempt at a derail. can't reply at the topic at hand so switch gears.
like i said yesterday, coin and I both agreed that you are an idiot and not worth fighting over. I deleted my posts there so I wouldn't look like you do here everyday.
<< <i>
You mean you weren't man enough to leave your posts up...you opened your mouth, he handed you your ass, you deleted them and ran away like the punk you are. Real classy, dope.
<< <i>stay on topic, the posts I deleted over there have nothing to do with this topic.
more proof you are the derailer of threads.
Steve >>
This thread was derailed when the axtell fan club jumped on my post (again) without reading them (again). Why are you so dense, WP?
More to the point is why are you so stupid?
again, nice try at a derail, just proves you derail almost every thread you jump into.
reason? you know nothing about sports.
Steve