Barry Bonds On Trial

[Tim McG]

I'm out as well. I feel like I'm pushing a peanut up a hill with my nose. We'll just need to agree to disagree. I'm OK with that.

Fair enough.

I give up; you can't even read what you write, apparently.

That's the best approach. There have been PMs speculating that he's a troll program.

So we can't disagree without somebody being a troll?

Wow.

[TedR]

So you don't understand what a troll program is. Instead you think you're being called a troll. Please read what is written, OK?

Wow.

[Noj]

You never know...

[Tim McG]

The Bonds defense team rests its case today without calling ONE witness.

They know as well as I do that the Feds have no case.

[Dan Gould]

Or they couldn't possibly risk putting Bonds on the stand and have the prosecution go after him.

[Tim McG]

Or they couldn't possibly risk putting Bonds on the stand and have the prosecution go after him.

What defense attorney in his right mind would ever put his client on the stand? It is simply not done.

[Indestructible!]

It pains me greatly to say this, but Bonds is going to walk without any of these charges sticking. From what I've read, I'm sure there will be at least a few jurors who will not find him guilty on any of the remaining counts.

I have no idea what Bonds will be paying Anderson in the future for his "cooperation", but I imagine it will be a princely sum. I guess whatever the amount is it will have been worth it for Bonds.

[Aggie87]

It pains me greatly to say this, but Bonds is going to walk without any of these charges sticking. From what I've read, I'm sure there will be at least a few jurors who will not find him guilty on any of the remaining counts.

I have no idea what Bonds will be paying Anderson in the future for his "cooperation", but I imagine it will be a princely sum. I guess whatever the amount is it will have been worth it for Bonds.

I agree that Anderson is getting paid a fine sum for his non-cooperation.

But I think regardless of the outcome of the court case, in the court of public opinion Bonds is toast, forevermore.

[Tim McG]

It pains me greatly to say this, but Bonds is going to walk without any of these charges sticking. From what I've read, I'm sure there will be at least a few jurors who will not find him guilty on any of the remaining counts.

I have no idea what Bonds will be paying Anderson in the future for his "cooperation", but I imagine it will be a princely sum. I guess whatever the amount is it will have been worth it for Bonds.

You don't know that about Anderson any more than we know when the World will end.

It is my sincere hope that all of those who pretend speculation and photoshop is truth will FINALLY get the clue about reality vs inuendo.

But then again, they probably won't.

It pains me greatly to say this, but Bonds is going to walk without any of these charges sticking. From what I've read, I'm sure there will be at least a few jurors who will not find him guilty on any of the remaining counts.

I have no idea what Bonds will be paying Anderson in the future for his "cooperation", but I imagine it will be a princely sum. I guess whatever the amount is it will have been worth it for Bonds.

I agree that Anderson is getting paid a fine sum for his non-cooperation.

But I think regardless of the outcome of the court case, in the court of public opinion Bonds is toast, forevermore.

Only in the smallest of minds, Aggie.

The court of public opinion relies upon gossip, lies and half-truth.

More's to pity.

Edited April 10, 2011 by GoodSpeak

[Aggie87]

Only in the smallest of minds, Aggie.

The court of public opinion relies upon gossip, lies and half-truth.

More's to pity.

I guess your mind is greater than the vast majority of the population then. Congratulations.

[TedR]

Geez Good, you need to learn to relax. The court of public opinion isn't attacking you. Tell you what, maybe it's time to chill to some nice jazz tunes. I recommend John Scofield's Quiet. Great album.

[Tim McG]

Only in the smallest of minds, Aggie.

The court of public opinion relies upon gossip, lies and half-truth.

More's to pity.

I guess your mind is greater than the vast majority of the population then. Congratulations.

Oh?

I have been an advocate for legal procedure from the start. As in the court system, Aggie, not the court public opinion. How you can read otherwise is for others to ponder.

Geez Good, you need to learn to relax. The court of public opinion isn't attacking you. Tell you what, maybe it's time to chill to some nice jazz tunes. I recommend John Scofield's Quiet. Great album.

Never said it was, Ted...but you are.

Take a chill pill, Dude.

[Aggie87]

I have been an advocate for legal procedure from the start. As in the court system, Aggie, not the court public opinion. How you can read otherwise is for others to ponder.

Glad to hear you are supporting the court finally. So if or when Bonds is found guilty, you will finally admit to what Bonds has already admitted, that he took drugs that enhanced his performance, rendering his records worthless and undefinable.

And regardless whether the court finds him guilty, I stand by my statement that he will be forever guilty in the court of public opinion.

[TedR]

Woah.

Where were you being attacked, Good?

Only using your words and example to help you out. Mentioned a different album though.

Waddaya say you share some of those chill pills............dude?

[Tim McG]

I have been an advocate for legal procedure from the start. As in the court system, Aggie, not the court public opinion. How you can read otherwise is for others to ponder.

Glad to hear you are supporting the court finally. So if or when Bonds is found guilty, you will finally admit to what Bonds has already admitted, that he took drugs that enhanced his performance, rendering his records worthless and undefinable.

And regardless whether the court finds him guilty, I stand by my statement that he will be forever guilty in the court of public opinion.

I have always believed the court system needs to handle this, not the media or photoshop bullshit. However, I think the prosecution has no case and is, at this point, desperately trying to justify the colossal waste of taxpayer money by getting him on something...anything. The so-called "court of public opinion" is morally corrupt and ethically bankrupt, Aggie. That same "court" was the source of lynchings, too. You think about that.

This must be a personal gripe for you, Aggie. I mean, every response you make has to be some angry commentary about what you think I believe. Yet, with a little research, you will note that I never said Bonds didn't take steroids.

All I have ever said is there is no proof that he did. I have already acknowledged that he took "the clear". And, if you will further note, I have said [numerous times] that I couldn't care less if he did use steroids. Why? Because steroids do not make a player hit HRs. They just make them bigger.

Tell me, if he is found not guilty, will you finally acknowledge there was no proof he ever took steroids or is this just a one sided thing with you?

Hm.

Edited April 11, 2011 by GoodSpeak

[Aggie87]

I have been an advocate for legal procedure from the start. As in the court system, Aggie, not the court public opinion. How you can read otherwise is for others to ponder.

Glad to hear you are supporting the court finally. So if or when Bonds is found guilty, you will finally admit to what Bonds has already admitted, that he took drugs that enhanced his performance, rendering his records worthless and undefinable.

And regardless whether the court finds him guilty, I stand by my statement that he will be forever guilty in the court of public opinion.

I have always believed the court system needs to handle this, not the media or photoshop bullshit. However, I think the prosecution has no case and is, at this point, desperately trying to justify the colossal waste of taxpayer money by getting him on something...anything. The so-called "court of public opinion" is morally corrupt and ethically bankrupt, Aggie. That same "court" was the source of lynchings, too. You think about that.

This must be a personal gripe for you, Aggie. I mean, every response you make has to be some angry commentary about what you think I believe. Yet, with a little research, you will note that I never said Bonds didn't take steroids.

All I have ever said is there is no proof that he did. I have already acknowledged that he took "the clear". And, if you will further note, I have said [numerous times] that I couldn't care less if he did use steroids. Why? Because steroids do not make a player hit HRs. They just make them bigger.

Tell me, if he is found not guilty, will you finally acknowledge there was no proof he ever took steroids or is this just a one sided thing with you?

Hm.

You completely avoided the point of my comment. Being a supporter - an advocate even - of the court, you have to accept their conclusion if Bonds is found guilty.

And your powers of perception are completely off, as usual. There is no anger in any of my comments. Maybe some paranoia or persecution complex on your part, I'd guess.

If he is not found guilty, that simply means the jury didn't think there was enough evidence presented to convict. Greg Anderson sitting in jail throughout the trial is convincing enough to most thinking-people to be a clear sign there is guilt on Bonds' part. Period. End of story.

Steroids do in fact increase strength. Just take a look at the link I provided previously, from a credible source. You skipped right over that before. Increased strength CLEARLY helps power hitters hit the ball further, creating the potential for additional home runs. No way to deny that, for reasonable people.

Edited April 11, 2011 by Aggie87

[Indestructible!]

Tell me, if he is found not guilty, will you finally acknowledge there was no proof he ever took steroids or is this just a one sided thing with you?

Again, this trial is not about determining whether Bonds "ever took steroids"... it is a trial centered on notion of perjury.

As an aside, wouldn't the positive test observed through regular MLB testing constitute proof that he took steroids?

[Tim McG]

Tell me, if he is found not guilty, will you finally acknowledge there was no proof he ever took steroids or is this just a one sided thing with you?

Again, this trial is not about determining whether Bonds "ever took steroids"... it is a trial centered on notion of perjury.

As an aside, wouldn't the positive test observed through regular MLB testing constitute proof that he took steroids?

On the contrary. This trial BEGAN with the speculation Bonds took steroids. It has morphed into a trial about whether or not he lied about taking steroids.

There were no positive tests which could be substantiated as legitimate; a controlled environment. The "tape" about "doping schedules" said nothing about steroids, either. The "court of public opinion" and the media coined the phrase "doping schedules".

The prosecution is relying upon guilt by association and angry ex-girlfriends.

They have no case here and they know it.

Edited April 11, 2011 by GoodSpeak

[Dan Gould]

On the contrary. This trial BEGAN with the speculation Bonds took steroids. It has morphed into a trial about whether or not he lied about taking steroids.

I just can't ignore this shit any longer. The trial began with speculation that he took steroids then "morphed" into a trial about whether he lied about taking steroids?

In the words of the immortal John McEnroe

YOU CANNOT BE FUCKING SERIOUS!

There were no positive tests which could be substantiated as legitimate; a controlled environment. The "tape" about "doping schedules" said nothing about steroids, either. The "court of public opinion" and the media coined the phrase "doping schedules".

Once again you betray an appalling lack of understanding of basic facts of the evidence, both that which was allowed into evidence by the judge and that which was disallowed.

Here are the facts:

Testimony was given that the 2003 "survey" results for Bonds blood sample were initially negative for steroids then when they knew what they were looking for (remember, BALCO's pitch was "undetectable" steroids) ... POSITIVE for the CLEAR and the CREAM.

The test results are 100% legitimate and they show that Bonds used what BALCO and Greg Anderson were selling: Performance Enhancing Drugs.

"Doping schedules" were not even mentioned in the indictment, because Greg Anderson refused to testify against his friend. Greg Anderson could have stood before the jury and said "I never told Barry that what I was giving him were steroids" but he has refused to do that and by his willful obstruction of justice took a hacksaw to the case the Feds could have presented, including:

• 
  
  
• The positive steroid test results found in BALCO's records;
  
• That "Doping CALENDAR" with Barry Lamar Bonds' initials on it, which followed the Giants' baseball schedule to the T and showed Bonds receiving regular injections of various steroids.
  
  

The fact that the jury spent all of Friday discussing the charges and asking to see or hear some of the evidence again is a very bad sign for Bonds, in my opinion. The defense presented no case - a signal to the jury that there is nothing to see here, they should return a not-guilty verdict in no time. If indeed "the feds got no case" then why would it take them more than a day to return a verdict? Why would they ask to hear the court reporter repeat the testimony of "Barry's girl" about watching Anderson inject Bonds?

The fact that they didn't pull an OJ and take 90 minutes to acquit tells me that there are at least some people on the jury who are taking their obligation seriously. At this point Bonds may be hoping for a hung jury.

[Tim McG]

I have been an advocate for legal procedure from the start. As in the court system, Aggie, not the court public opinion. How you can read otherwise is for others to ponder.

Glad to hear you are supporting the court finally. So if or when Bonds is found guilty, you will finally admit to what Bonds has already admitted, that he took drugs that enhanced his performance, rendering his records worthless and undefinable.

And regardless whether the court finds him guilty, I stand by my statement that he will be forever guilty in the court of public opinion.

I have always believed the court system needs to handle this, not the media or photoshop bullshit. However, I think the prosecution has no case and is, at this point, desperately trying to justify the colossal waste of taxpayer money by getting him on something...anything. The so-called "court of public opinion" is morally corrupt and ethically bankrupt, Aggie. That same "court" was the source of lynchings, too. You think about that.

This must be a personal gripe for you, Aggie. I mean, every response you make has to be some angry commentary about what you think I believe. Yet, with a little research, you will note that I never said Bonds didn't take steroids.

All I have ever said is there is no proof that he did. I have already acknowledged that he took "the clear". And, if you will further note, I have said [numerous times] that I couldn't care less if he did use steroids. Why? Because steroids do not make a player hit HRs. They just make them bigger.

Tell me, if he is found not guilty, will you finally acknowledge there was no proof he ever took steroids or is this just a one sided thing with you?

Hm.

You completely avoided the point of my comment. Being a supporter - an advocate even - of the court, you have to accept their conclusion if Bonds is found guilty.

And your powers of perception are completely off, as usual. There is no anger in any of my comments. Maybe some paranoia or persecution complex on your part, I'd guess.

If he is not found guilty, that simply means the jury didn't think there was enough evidence presented to convict. Greg Anderson sitting in jail throughout the trial is convincing enough to most thinking-people to be a clear sign there is guilt on Bonds' part. Period. End of story.

Steroids do in fact increase strength. Just take a look at the link I provided previously, from a credible source. You skipped right over that before. Increased strength CLEARLY helps power hitters hit the ball further, creating the potential for additional home runs. No way to deny that, for reasonable people.

So you accept the court's decision on OJ Simpson murder trial then?

Steroids increase strength not the ability to hit HRs. There is no documented proof or credible source which will link HRs to steroids. None. Speculation and photoshopped pictures notwithstanding.

Gimme a break, Aggie.

Edited April 12, 2011 by GoodSpeak

[TedR]

Photo shopped pictures are ALWAYS considered evidence not only in the court of public opinion but in every publication and court in the land. They are not considered manipulated photos by any one. Photo shopped pictures are NEVER humorous and satirical. Only the smallest of minds cannot differentiate between satire and serious evidence with serious intent.

[Brad]

This has been a waste of a thread. Who cares? He has been convicted (or maybe not) in the court of public opinion, regardless of his guilt or innocence.

But more importantly what a waste of public money.

Thank goodness he's out of baseball and the Giants won the Series without him.

[Tim McG]

On the contrary. This trial BEGAN with the speculation Bonds took steroids. It has morphed into a trial about whether or not he lied about taking steroids.

I just can't ignore this shit any longer. The trial began with speculation that he took steroids then "morphed" into a trial about whether he lied about taking steroids?

There were no positive tests which could be substantiated as legitimate; a controlled environment. The "tape" about "doping schedules" said nothing about steroids, either. The "court of public opinion" and the media coined the phrase "doping schedules".

Once again you betray an appalling lack of understanding of basic facts of the evidence, both that which was allowed into evidence by the judge and that which was disallowed.

Here are the facts:

Testimony was given that the 2003 "survey" results for Bonds blood sample were initially negative for steroids then when they knew what they were looking for (remember, BALCO's pitch was "undetectable" steroids) ... POSITIVE for the CLEAR and the CREAM.

The test results are 100% legitimate and they show that Bonds used what BALCO and Greg Anderson were selling: Performance Enhancing Drugs.

"Doping schedules" were not even mentioned in the indictment, because Greg Anderson refused to testify against his friend. Greg Anderson could have stood before the jury and said "I never told Barry that what I was giving him were steroids" but he has refused to do that and by his willful obstruction of justice took a hacksaw to the case the Feds could have presented, including:

• 
  
  
• The positive steroid test results found in BALCO's records;
  
• That "Doping CALENDAR" with Barry Lamar Bonds' initials on it, which followed the Giants' baseball schedule to the T and showed Bonds receiving regular injections of various steroids.
  
  

The fact that the jury spent all of Friday discussing the charges and asking to see or hear some of the evidence again is a very bad sign for Bonds, in my opinion. The defense presented no case - a signal to the jury that there is nothing to see here, they should return a not-guilty verdict in no time. If indeed "the feds got no case" then why would it take them more than a day to return a verdict? Why would they ask to hear the court reporter repeat the testimony of "Barry's girl" about watching Anderson inject Bonds?

The fact that they didn't pull an OJ and take 90 minutes to acquit tells me that there are at least some people on the jury who are taking their obligation seriously. At this point Bonds may be hoping for a hung jury.

No.

At this point I would say you're hoping for a conviction on anything.

Evidence and court cases, surprisingly, do not hinge upon your say so or put downs. I have already shown your "evidence" to be fatally flawed and biased. So let's move on, shall we?

[Dan Gould]

Too bad the jury obviously doesn't think the same thing about the evidence, or they'd be out already, wouldn't they?

[Aggie87]

Steroids increase strength not the ability to hit HRs. There is no documented proof or credible source which will link HRs to steroids. None. Speculation and photoshopped pictures notwithstanding.

I think most reasonable people believe that strength is a significant contributing factor in the distance a hit ball will travel. Thus it is a factor in the ability to hit HRs. No way around it.

If you have a 98 pound weakling that can barely lift a bat, there's no way he's going to swing hard enough to put a ball over the fence. Someone with substantial muscles like Barry Bonds can easily swing hard enough to put the ball into McCovey Cove.

Obviously, coordination, vision, timing, and other things are factors too, but clearly strength is a contributor. And steroids increase strength, as you admit.

C'mon, be real here.