Bonds Indicted [guilty on 1/4] [wrist whacked!]


A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (as always, locked for the duration of major international championship)

Bonds Indicted [guilty on 1/4] [wrist whacked!]

Postby guru » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:33 pm

guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Re: Bonds Indicted

Postby Daisy » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:40 pm

So do they have anything to prove he lied? Is Anderson talking?
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Bonds Indicted

Postby guru » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:43 pm

Daisy wrote:So do they have anything to prove he lied?


I think it's pretty fair to assume they dotted the i's and crossed the t's before they went forward. Unfortunately, 3 months too late for Aaron.
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Postby gh » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:02 pm

The prosecutors better ask for a change of venue if they want an unbiased jury!
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby bad hammy » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:07 pm

gh wrote:The prosecutors better ask for a change of venue if they want an unbiased jury!

Really?? You think there is an area of the country that is not biased about Bonds???
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10881
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Bonds Indicted

Postby paulthefan » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:13 pm

guru wrote:... Unfortunately, 3 months too late for Aaron.


He should have quit while he was really ahead. Messing with ancient markers is a very very dangerous thing to do.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby gh » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:22 pm

bad hammy wrote:
gh wrote:The prosecutors better ask for a change of venue if they want an unbiased jury!

Really?? You think there is an area of the country that is not biased about Bonds???


Of course, but they're biased the other way; I'm saying he can't get convicted in the Bay Area, so the prosecutors should look for change of venue. (not the judge)
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby paulthefan » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:28 pm

gh wrote:Of course, but they're biased the other way; I'm saying he can't get convicted in the Bay Area, so the prosecutors should look for change of venue. (not the judge)


nonsense, this whole idea that people are so biased on an issue that they will not be fair is unfounded. There are many americans that are convinced that he is a baseball cheat (no the only one of course) but would be completely fair in weighing the evidence for guilt regarding the charges. Folks are by and large profoundly fair and open minded.
Last edited by paulthefan on Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby guru » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:29 pm

Oops.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2945112

"I'll outmaneuver them at every turn," (Bonds attorney Michael)Rains told the newspaper Saturday night. "I've kicked their ass in private, I'll continue to kick their ass in public."
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Postby unclezadok » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:32 pm

I hope no actual crimes are going uninvestigated while the feds are wasting their time, and taxpayer money, with this garbage.
unclezadok
 
Posts: 1552
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 2:54 pm

Re: Bonds Indicted

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:37 pm

guru wrote:Better late than never.

I say better never than late. The Feds are so arbitrary about who they go after for the most trivial of offenses. Martha Stewart can tell you all about that.

Prediction: Though I don't think this indictment is racially motivated, this trial will cause America's racial divide to rear it's ugly head once again. And you can take that to the bank.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby guru » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:38 pm

unclezadok wrote:I hope no actual crimes are going uninvestigated while the feds are wasting their time, and taxpayer money, with this garbage.


You're right. Lying to a grand jury and obstructing a federal investigation are child's play.
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Postby guru » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:43 pm

Anderson ordered released from prison today. Uh-oh.
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:45 pm

paulthefan wrote:nonsense, this whole idea that people are so biased on an issue that they will not be fair is unfounded. There are many americans that are convinced that he is a baseball cheat (no the only one of course) but would be completely fair in weighing the evidence for guilt regarding the charges. Folks are by and large are profoundly fair and open minded.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you would feel this way. Unfortunately my life experiences, recollection of American history and understanding of human nature leads me to different perspective.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:48 pm

guru wrote:
unclezadok wrote:I hope no actual crimes are going uninvestigated while the feds are wasting their time, and taxpayer money, with this garbage.


You're right. Lying to a grand jury and obstructing a federal investigation are child's play.

Our President didn't think that these offenses warranted jail time for Scooter Libby and most Republican politicians and pundits agreed with him.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby paulthefan » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:52 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you would feel this way. Unfortunately my life experiences, recollection of American history and understanding of human nature leads me to different perspective.


Please remember that just as in the Martha Stewart case once the wheels of an investigation get started they roll, They can not in the middle of an investigation set up a firewall around "popular personalities"... for instance if an investigation into securities exchange crimes or insider trading violations leads unexpectedly from a CEO to a stock broker to a popular personality there is no legal mechanism that allows an investigator to say "uh-oh" this could get some bad press we had better turn this off... You do that as a federal prosecutor and your career is over and you are standing before a congressional subcommittee answering alot of ethics charges.

Likewise the US people have enacted laws regarding controlled substances and laws regarding perjury. Those two can not just be suspended because a popular baseball player is in the frying pan... once an investigation gets rolling you can not stop it.
Last edited by paulthefan on Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby guru » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:54 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
guru wrote:
unclezadok wrote:I hope no actual crimes are going uninvestigated while the feds are wasting their time, and taxpayer money, with this garbage.


You're right. Lying to a grand jury and obstructing a federal investigation are child's play.

Our President didn't think that these offenses warranted jail time for Scooter Libby and most Republican politicians and pundits agreed with him.



Libby still has a felony conviction, $250,000 fine, and probation to serve.

edit: I believe he SHOULD have done his jail time, the whold Plame thing was repugnant, but he didn't get off scot-free.
Last edited by guru on Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Postby bad hammy » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:02 pm

guru wrote:
unclezadok wrote:I hope no actual crimes are going uninvestigated while the feds are wasting their time, and taxpayer money, with this garbage.

You're right. Lying to a grand jury and obstructing a federal investigation are child's play.

Betwwen your holier than thou stuff on this thread and the Ricky Williams thread, who stuck the stick up you butt today??
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10881
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby guru » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:05 pm

bad hammy wrote:Betwwen your holier than thou stuff on this thread...


Remind me what town you live in? :P
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Postby gh » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:10 pm

paulthefan wrote:...nonsense, this whole idea that people are so biased on an issue that they will not be fair is unfounded. There are many americans that are convinced that he is a baseball cheat (no the only one of course) but would be completely fair in weighing the evidence for guilt regarding the charges. Folks are by and large profoundly fair and open minded.


If you lived here and listened to talk radio you'd perhaps feel slightly different. Bonds enjoys godlike status among a lot of the faithful.

But realize I'm not saying that "most" locals think he's innocent. All I'm suggesting is that it's just a mere 8.3% of his peers (i.e., 1 in 12) believing in his innocence is all that's required to set him free. I'm thinking that'll be an easy sell.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby marknhj » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:17 pm

guru wrote:
bad hammy wrote:Betwwen your holier than thou stuff on this thread...


Remind me what town you live in? :P


Oakland. Crackhead central :D
Last edited by marknhj on Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
marknhj
 
Posts: 5070
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby 26mi235 » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:18 pm

gh wrote:
paulthefan wrote:...nonsense, this whole idea that people are so biased on an issue that they will not be fair is unfounded. There are many americans that are convinced that he is a baseball cheat (no the only one of course) but would be completely fair in weighing the evidence for guilt regarding the charges. Folks are by and large profoundly fair and open minded.


If you lived here and listened to talk radio you'd perhaps feel slightly different. Bonds enjoys godlike status among a lot of the faithful.

But realize I'm not saying that "most" locals think he's innocent. All I'm suggesting is that it's just a mere 8.3% of his peers (i.e., 1 in 12) believing in his innocence is all that's required to set him free. I'm thinking that'll be an easy sell.


It is a little different than that. The 8% number is the 'ex post' number but your commentary is treating is as the 'ex ante' one. Specifically, both sides get challenges and I will guess that they have some ability to detect those with an opinion that might cause problems. However, I do not know the number of challenges etc.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16337
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Postby bad hammy » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:23 pm

guru wrote:
bad hammy wrote:Betwwen your holier than thou stuff on this thread...


Remind me what town you live in? :P

Someplace where less than half the local NFL team is in jail . . .
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10881
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tafnut » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:26 pm

bad hammy wrote:
Remind me what town you live in? :P

Someplace where less than half the local NFL team is in jail . . .

Well, then you're doing better than my home-town! Jags are always on the police blotter here! :(
Last edited by tafnut on Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby bad hammy » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:26 pm

The indictment, with specific testimony alleged to be perjured: http://cdn.sfgate.com/chronicle/acrobat ... ctment.pdf
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10881
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:34 pm

paulthefan wrote:Please remember that just as in the Martha Stewart case once the wheels of an investigation get started they roll, They can not in the middle of an investigation set up a firewall around "popular personalities"... for instance if an investigation into securities exchange crimes or insider trading violations leads unexpectedly from a CEO to a broker to a popular personality there is no legal mechanism that allows an investigator to say "uh-oh" this could get some bad press we had better turn this off... You do that as a federal prosecutor and your career is over and you are standing before a congressional subcommittee answering alot of ethics charges.

Likewise the US people have enacted laws regarding controlled substances and laws regarding perjury. Those two can not just be suspended because a popular baseball player is in the frying pan... once an investigation gets rolling you can not stop it.

You're wrong Paulthefan. Even Federal prosecutors have discretion over what they will prosecute and what they won't. Career ambition and political consideration play a huge part. The judge threw out the insider trading charges against Martha Stewart because it was selective prosecution (Stewart wasn't out buying info, it just fell into her lap). Similarly, Marcus Dixon's child molestation charges (two high school students have consensual sex and one is over eighteen-years-old) were thrown out by the Georgia Supreme Court because it was selective prosecution. On the other hand, if prosecutors were obligated to pursue everything they saw, Congressman Peter King of New York (a lifelong and avid supporter, fund raiser and collaborator of the IRA), would be locked up for life. But prosecutors knew how popular the IRA was on both sides of the aisle in Washington, so they left it alone.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby bad hammy » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:39 pm

If you have read the Game of Shadows book you know that this indictment is the culmination of the BALCO investigation - it was always about Bonds, and everyone else implicated was just acceptable collateral damage.
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10881
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby gh » Thu Nov 15, 2007 5:09 pm

26mi235 wrote:
gh wrote:
paulthefan wrote:...nonsense, this whole idea that people are so biased on an issue that they will not be fair is unfounded. There are many americans that are convinced that he is a baseball cheat (no the only one of course) but would be completely fair in weighing the evidence for guilt regarding the charges. Folks are by and large profoundly fair and open minded.


If you lived here and listened to talk radio you'd perhaps feel slightly different. Bonds enjoys godlike status among a lot of the faithful.

But realize I'm not saying that "most" locals think he's innocent. All I'm suggesting is that it's just a mere 8.3% of his peers (i.e., 1 in 12) believing in his innocence is all that's required to set him free. I'm thinking that'll be an easy sell.


It is a little different than that. The 8% number is the 'ex post' number but your commentary is treating is as the 'ex ante' one. Specifically, both sides get challenges and I will guess that they have some ability to detect those with an opinion that might cause problems. However, I do not know the number of challenges etc.


You're throwing in decimal points where none are needed. The important fact is that it's only going to take 1 juror to make him innocent, not a majority.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Nov 15, 2007 5:22 pm

ESPN's Stephen A. Smith played the race card front and center on SportCenter.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby gh » Thu Nov 15, 2007 5:27 pm

I don't see where there's a race card to play in this one: when you're chasing down big fish in the Wall Street World, you're pretty likely gonna end up w/ white guys; in pro sports....

Unless there's evidence that, say, Jason Giambi also lied to the GJ (before later coming clean).
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby bad hammy » Thu Nov 15, 2007 5:32 pm

While out at lunch the race card mentioned by callers on the sports radio show was the disparate treatment of Bonds vs. McGwire. The talks show hosts were having none of that . . .
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10881
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby gh » Thu Nov 15, 2007 5:58 pm

Leaving the office I turned on local sportstalk; major local station (which is also host for the Giants). First caller was in mid-rant when I tuned in; lamenting how the legal persecution is always the high-profile people, cuz they're easy targets. Concluded his rant with, "If I end up on that jury, I'm voting not guilty no matter what the evidence says."

Next two callers (both of whom sounded well-educated, well-reason guys, not JoeSix grunting stereotypes) both went on at lenght about selective persecution and said they'd probably vote not guilty as well, although the final guy say he hated to betray the system that way.

I know I'd feel like crap if I were in a position where I had to selectively punish somebody like that, but if you can't keep the legal system operating based on the evidence, we're in a pretty scary position as a society. (Not that this probably any different than it ever was; just don't think people would be so open about it in the past.)
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby mcgato » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:09 pm

gh wrote:I know I'd feel like crap if I were in a position where I had to selectively punish somebody like that, but if you can't keep the legal system operating based on the evidence, we're in a pretty scary position as a society. (Not that this probably any different than it ever was; just don't think people would be so open about it in the past.)

Interesting comment from the editor of TFN, who some claim took a blind eye to the drug problems within the sport, to the ultimate detriment of the sport.

Post yanked in three, two, ....
mcgato
 
Posts: 1607
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Hoboken

Postby guru » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:11 pm

guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Postby tafnut » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:17 pm

gh wrote:I know I'd feel like crap if I were in a position where I had to selectively punish somebody like that

I'd feel pretty good about putting him away if I'm on the jury and I have good evidence he's guilty. Selectivity has nothing to do with it. Guilt does.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby guru » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:24 pm

Here's the thing - he had full immunity from prosecution due to anything he said in the grand jury room(if it was the truth), and he lied anyway.
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Postby 26mi235 » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:58 pm

gh wrote:
26mi235 wrote:
gh wrote:
paulthefan wrote:...nonsense, this whole idea that people are so biased on an issue that they will not be fair is unfounded. There are many americans that are convinced that he is a baseball cheat (no the only one of course) but would be completely fair in weighing the evidence for guilt regarding the charges. Folks are by and large profoundly fair and open minded.


If you lived here and listened to talk radio you'd perhaps feel slightly different. Bonds enjoys godlike status among a lot of the faithful.

But realize I'm not saying that "most" locals think he's innocent. All I'm suggesting is that it's just a mere 8.3% of his peers (i.e., 1 in 12) believing in his innocence is all that's required to set him free. I'm thinking that'll be an easy sell.


It is a little different than that. The 8% number is the 'ex post' number but your commentary is treating is as the 'ex ante' one. Specifically, both sides get challenges and I will guess that they have some ability to detect those with an opinion that might cause problems. However, I do not know the number of challenges etc.


You're throwing in decimal points where none are needed. The important fact is that it's only going to take 1 juror to make him innocent, not a majority.


It only takes one juror: 8% of what, of 12 that get on the jury. However, there is a selection process that takes you down from the jury pool into the set of 12 selected jurors. If one in 12 of those in the pool of 96 (total of 8) are the ones that do acquittal and you can identify them with 50% probability and get to challenge 10 jurors, then you can remove about 5 of them, so now the reduced population is 3 out of 86 or 3 of 76 because the other side removes 10 zero probability candidates. 3/76 < 1/12.

It is not quite as simple but you get the idea.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16337
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Postby gh » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:28 pm

mcgato wrote:....
Interesting comment from the editor of TFN, who some claim took a blind eye to the drug problems within the sport, to the ultimate detriment of the sport.

Post yanked in three, two, ....


I have no apologies for taking the prudent (i.e., not ruin the company, or trash reputations with no legal evidence) course the magazine did (and will continue to do). There's a huge difference between that and discharging one's duties as a juror. I'd probably cast a guilty verdict against my own mother if it came to it.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby eldrick » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:49 pm

mcgato wrote:
gh wrote:I know I'd feel like crap if I were in a position where I had to selectively punish somebody like that, but if you can't keep the legal system operating based on the evidence, we're in a pretty scary position as a society. (Not that this probably any different than it ever was; just don't think people would be so open about it in the past.)

Interesting comment from the editor of TFN, who some claim took a blind eye to the drug problems within the sport, to the ultimate detriment of the sport


eh ???

his job is not that of dick pound

an editorial of how well/bad, pound is doing his job sounds appropriate enough, but in the end it's pound's job to do

it was also pretty damn admirable that the editor didn't wade in armed to the gills when marion got her leaked "a" +ve test last year, allowing all the "yahoos" to die a painful, watery death when she got cleared on "b"

i didn't see any of those yahoos apologise after to an innocent athlete
eldrick
 
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Postby mcgato » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:57 pm

gh wrote:I have no apologies ...

I appreciate the reply and not yanking the post. I'm not in the business, but I kind of understand the conflicting forces surrounding these issues. I'll save the battle for another day.
mcgato
 
Posts: 1607
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Hoboken

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests