Anderson and Bonds

[Appling]

Barry Bonds' lifetime friend and personal trainer has again said he will return to jail rather than testify against his lifetime friend.

Heroic, isn't it? And honorable, not to squeal on a buddy?

But wait a minute! Didn't Greg Anderson already plead guilty to his own role in this matter -- to distribution of illegal PED's? And isn't he granted personal immunity against other charges if he agrees to testify truthfully in this case?
The only danger to Anderson personally, should he choose to testify, would be to perjure himself by not telling the truth to the Grand Jury.

If Barry is telling the truth -- that he never KNOWINGLY used performance-enhancing drugs -- what harm would it do to Barry if Anderson confirmed that fact under oath? Anderson should know the truth -- did he mislead Barry and not let him know what that white and clear stuff was that they put into Barry's body?

That Greg might refuse to testify on facts that would help Barry's case, makes no sense to me. More likely that his testimony would be harmful to Barry, and that is why Anderson is willing to accept another jail term rather then hurt his buddy.

Which leads me back to Barry... If Bonds did lie under oath, if he did knowingly use steroids and PEDs, why would he allow his best friend to sit in jail rather than for Barry to accept responsibility for his own actions? Is that a MANLY thing to do? Is it an HONORABLE thing to do?

If Barry should now come forward and tell the truth, and allow Greg Anderson to testify truthfully to the Grand Jury, I think he would earn respect from the public -- more respect than he has had in years! Just be a man, tell the truth, let his buddy tell the truth, and take full responsiblity for his own actions.

Has he any other choice?

[blslivewire]

That Greg might refuse to testify on facts that would help Barry's case, makes no sense to me. More likely that his testimony would be harmful to Barry, and that is why Anderson is willing to accept another jail term rather then hurt his buddy.

Which leads me back to Barry... If Bonds did lie under oath, if he did knowingly use steroids and PEDs, why would he allow his best friend to sit in jail rather than for Barry to accept responsibility for his own actions? Is that a MANLY thing to do? Is it an HONORABLE thing to do?

If Barry should now come forward and tell the truth, and allow Greg Anderson to testify truthfully to the Grand Jury, I think he would earn respect from the public -- more respect than he has had in years! Just be a man, tell the truth, let his buddy tell the truth, and take full responsiblity for his own actions.

Has he any other choice?

I hate to get all macho here but Barry isn't a real man-if by your definition of a man is one who has honor, standards and takes personal responsibility. Barry is a childish cheater living in another reality.

Barry is obviously paying off his friend. Anderson has at least one kid that Barry's putting through college and then some.

Anderson, evidently, has no legal means of supporting himself so he figures he'll just rot in jail and make a nice check that way.

Plus, it's pretty obvious that Anderson is a star f'er. He might be so obsessed with the celebrity life that Bonds might not even have to pay him off.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

why would he allow his best friend to sit in jail rather than for Barry to accept responsibility for his own actions?

Why? Because its all about Barry of course.

I think there's a definite pay-day in it for Anderson to do the time.

[KHenry14]

Specifically, Anderson is refusing to testify because he believes the Grand Jury cannot guarantee that his testimony will not be leaked. There are other reasons too, such as his phone being tapped illeagally, but that is the case him and Mark Geragos are making.

The Grand Jury process is supposed to be kept from the public so people may testify without outside pressures influencing the testimony. But as we have seen, someone (likely the DA's office) leaked previous testimony that has damaged a lot of people. Regardless as to whether or not one likes Barry, or for that matter, Sheffield and Giambi, that testimony should never have seen the light of day.

[Whitesoxnut]

For the right $$ number I'd probably rot in jail for awhiles too. Especially since he has a felony conviction already anyways, which is a small price to pay for those who live their lives seeking fame. Then after all that there is the inevitable book deal. Look at it from Andersons point of view. He went from a nobody to a guy who will always be famous in the twisted California sports world, the one where Bonds can do no wrong.

Its common in politics and the business world for one person to take the heat, play golf at Club-Fed for a year or two, and then retire without worrying about a day job.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

If they've done nothing wrong, then why worry about what gets leaked?

MLB and many fans have had their heads in the sand about this entire issue. How would sealed testimony help to remove those heads?

[blslivewire]

Its common in politics and the business world for one person to take the heat, play golf at Club-Fed for a year or two, and then retire without worrying about a day job.

I don't think it's automatic he's going to a country club resort like Martha Stewart or Tommy Chong went to. They have money and celebrity to begin with. I may be underestimating Bonds' influence here but I don't think he'll be able to help Anderson as far as what type of facility he goes to.

On the other hand, Bonds will supply him with some kick ass laywers and perjury is a non violent crime so he may end up in a minimium security resort.

On the other other hand he does have a record already so who the hell knows.

[KHenry14]

If they've done nothing wrong, then why worry about what gets leaked?

MLB and many fans have had their heads in the sand about this entire issue. How would sealed testimony help to remove those heads?

That's not the way it works Sultan. The GJ system has for a long time supposed to keep testimony secret so the investigation can continue without the testimony corrupting the process.

You are right, MLB has been deliberately ignorant of this problem, but that's not what this Grand Jury is about. This testimony is a criminal matter, and not what MLB is investigating separately with the Mitchell committee. MLB isn't served one way or another by the GJ, as they can't suspend anyone because of the GJ, no matter what the Commissioner says.

[Astro]

He isnt testifying because he does not have to, it's called the Bill of Rights... if you want to complain about that then you really need help

[Whitesoxnut]

He isnt testifying because he does not have to, it's called the Bill of Rights... if you want to complain about that then you really need help

You think he went to jail because he "didn't have to" do anything? The bill of rights defines the rights of the accused regarding self-incrimination. Unless your the accused who is charged and being prosecuted by the court I'm afraid you do have to show up and testify. If you dont you'll get nailed for contempt and jailed.....just like Greg Anderson.:eek:

I suggest you actually read The Bill of Rights before you start saying others need help.

[west coast orange and black]

blslivewire: I hate to get all macho here...
really?

Anderson has at least one kid that Barry's putting through college and then some.
really?

Plus, it's pretty obvious that Anderson is a star f'er.
it is clear that you have no idea what the actual story is.

[west coast orange and black]

sultan: If they've done nothing wrong, then why worry about what gets leaked?
:( (the sound of millions of citizens groaning.)

[west coast orange and black]

KHenry14: Specifically, Anderson is refusing to testify because he believes the Grand Jury cannot guarantee that his testimony will not be leaked. There are other reasons too, such as his phone being tapped illegally, but that is the case him and Mark Geragos are making.

the talk going around is that because the feds performed sloppy work and so badly botched the case against bonds, public shame (the leaks) rather than a trial verdict was utilized. also, the idea of the "will of the people" quickly gave way to personal scores to settle.

[west coast orange and black]

appling: The only danger to Anderson personally, should he choose to testify, would be to perjure himself by not telling the truth to the Grand Jury.
actually, there is no telling what action(s) the feds would try should anderson testify; the feds have demonstrated that they can not be trusted.

If Barry is telling the truth -- that he never KNOWINGLY used performance-enhancing drugs -- what harm would it do to Barry if Anderson confirmed that fact under oath?
you mean confirm such to the grand jury? the one with sealed testimony?

why would [Bonds] allow his best friend to sit in jail rather than for Barry to accept responsibility for his own actions?
maybe it is anderson's call, not bonds'.

If Barry should now come forward and tell the truth, and allow Greg Anderson to testify truthfully to the Grand Jury, I think he would earn respect from the public -- more respect than he has had in years!
luke, do you really believe that that would be the case?

[blslivewire]

Plus, it's pretty obvious that Anderson is a star f'er.
it is clear that you have no idea what the actual story is.

Enlighten me please.

[Whitesoxnut]

Enlighten me please.

West Coast doesnt "enlighten". He spreads disinformation and attempts misdirection. Ive been waiting for awhiles to hear the "actual story" from the Bonds groupies here. So far.........no actual story:laugh "A common political tactic, promising an "actual story" and then allowing the months to water down the publics interest and get the thing off of the front page".

Everyone reads the front page. But who always reads page 7 ?

[Bob Sacamento]

West Coast doesnt "enlighten". He spreads disinformation and attempts misdirection. Sounds alot like some nutty Whitesox fan

Ive been waiting for awhiles to hear the "actual story" from the Bonds groupies here. So far.........no actual story No one but Bonds and Anderson have the actual story, and neither of them are going to talk. At least the "groupies" aren't running around fabricating stories and trying to turn peanut butter to diamonds in their hands. I'll gladly take the defending groupies over the overzealous "haters".

The FEDS don't have the proof. Elsewise they would have got Bonds already, because getting a Grand Jury indictment is EASY. And if you don't get one it means you don't have enough evidence to convict him. Even though you know he's guility, you can't prove it. He might be guility morally but he's innocent legally.

What's the downside of Barry going free? It makes the Feds look bad. Bonds is only a menace to baseball, not society. You go after the sellers/distributors of illegal drugs not the users. The government got BALCO, Conte, and Anderson, anything past this is the FEDS holding a grudge and trying to make an example out of Barry. They wanted the high profile guy, and missed big time. Now it's time to move on...

If the steroids don't show, you gotta let him go.
If you can't prove the juice, you gotta cut him loose.
If you can't prove he lied, you gotta let the case subside.

[west coast orange and black]

blslivewire: Enlighten me please.
what is it, specifically, that you want to know?

[west coast orange and black]

whitesoxnut: West Coast doesnt "enlighten". He spreads disinformation and attempts misdirection. Ive been waiting for awhiles to hear the "actual story" from the Bonds groupies here.

to the contrary: you have posted in a matter-of-fact way several times without being able to back it up, when asked; you have not provided the critical info necessary.

when i read misinformation here at bb-f, i usually ask for details or some sort of validation. many/most replies have gone the way yours: an accusation that i spread misinformation or attempt misdirection.

the "actual story" may or may not eventually surface. but presently, although you do know the entire story, you purport to, by way of your matter-of-fact postings.

what you seem to have failed to realize is that the spread of misinformation is a much more important topic to me than the bonds story, specifically. it matters less to me whom is being bashed than the manner in which it is done.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

:( (the sound of millions of citizens groaning.)

Yeah, the sound of a million guilty people who have something to hide :(

[Whitesoxnut]

Sounds alot like some nutty Whitesox fan

You want to start a name calling war Sacramento? I bet you'll lose, "BTW whats your interest in this"?

No one but Bonds and Anderson have the actual story, and neither of them are going to talk. At least the "groupies" aren't running around fabricating stories and trying to turn peanut butter to diamonds in their hands. I'll gladly take the defending groupies over the overzealous "haters".

Sorry sharpdog. But many others have much of the story, which even others can thread together in investigative reporting and legal investigation. Bonds himself, and also Anderson, told others about their activities. Anderson was a known drug peddler, has been convicted for it, was caught talking to a witness wearing a wire about how he supplied Bonds, Bonds told friends and associates about his use, another MLB player testified how Bonds set him up with Anderson and his steroids. Then you have Barrys 3 month incredible Hulk act and his power increases..........but this has all been talked about hasn't it?:laugh

"Overzealous haters"? Another classic misdirection move. So anyone who thinks Bonds used steroids and then lied about it to the grand Jury is an "overzealous hater"?:waving

The FEDS don't have the proof. Elsewise they would have got Bonds already, because getting a Grand Jury indictment is EASY. And if you don't get one it means you don't have enough evidence to convict him. Even though you know he's guility, you can't prove it. He might be guility morally but he's innocent legally.

I'll make this as simple as possible for you. Indictments are not that easy. They might be when the system is trying to indict me or you but it isn't so easy when they are indicting rich people. Even harder is getting a conviction, especially in California, a state that insists rich people are never guilty and anyone that thinks they are are "overzealous haters".:eek:

They are starting another grand jury. The last one sat for 18 months and thats a very long time to take people away from their jobs and families. The wheels of justice grind slow, prosecutors like to win, and they aren't going to rush anything. And you dont need to lecture me about moral guilt and legal quilt. Ive seen offenders get away with rape, murder, robbery, far worse things then Barry bonds ever did. A few times the victims, or their surviving families, changed from being "defending groupies" to card carrying Republicans after seeing how the system bends over backwards for the accused and could care less about victims. "Defending groupies" are generally those who have never been victimized.

What's the downside of Barry going free? It makes the Feds look bad. Bonds is only a menace to baseball, not society. You go after the sellers/distributors of illegal drugs not the users. The government got BALCO, Conte, and Anderson, anything past this is the FEDS holding a grudge and trying to make an example out of Barry. They wanted the high profile guy, and missed big time. Now it's time to move on...

One downside is if a serf like you, me, or West Coast, was in Bonds shoes the best we could hope for would be a heterosexual cell mate. Lying to a grand jury is a felony and "we" would go to jail over it. I guess the alternative would be to allow people to lie in court freely, show or not show as they see fit, or why even have laws in the first place?

As to how drug laws are enforced maybe you should re-write them before you change them in an internet forum. Bonds isn't in trouble for possession ; He's being investigated for lying to a Grand Jury. How hard is that to understand? And I suppose you have facts about this supposed "Grudge"?:laugh Boy, the defense would love to have you on the jury. Now your rhyming.

it is clear that you have no idea what the actual story is.

For the 12'th time West Coast I am patiently waiting for you to tell me the "real story".:laugh

[west coast orange and black]

whitesoxnut: For the 12'th time West Coast I am patiently waiting for you to tell me the "real story".:laugh

a) it is not 12 times; b) you have not been patiently waiting; c) you have not answered my questions directly; d) your emoticons reveal that you are not serious about having an above-board discussion.

[west coast orange and black]

sultan: If they've done nothing wrong, then why worry about what gets leaked?

:ughh (the sound of millions of citizens groaning.)

sultan: Yeah, the sound of a million guilty people who have something to hide

having something to hide v being interested in, and defending, civil rights.

. . . . . . . . .

sultan, you seem to be interested in the rule of law and this nation being a land of laws... except in some cases.
is this fair to say?

[Mattingly]

Whitesoxnut, from post #21, can you please knock off the stuff about Republicans or whether one's cellmate is gay or straight? That's got nothing whatsoever to do with baseball, if you don't mind.

Thanks. :)

[west coast orange and black]

whitesoxnut: I'll make this as simple as possible for you.
condescending.

Even harder is getting a conviction, especially in California, a state that insists rich people are never guilty and anyone that thinks they are are "overzealous haters".
please provide statistics.

They are starting another grand jury. The last one sat for 18 months...
18 months is the standard length of time for grand jury members.

...changed from being "defending groupies" to card carrying Republicans after seeing how the system bends over backwards for the accused and could care less about victims.
please provise stats for this, as well.

One downside is if a serf like you, me, or West Coast, was in Bonds shoes the best we could hope for would be a heterosexual cell mate.
read: "all homosexuals are violent sex offenders."

Lying to a grand jury is a felony and "we" would go to jail over it.
a) depends what the lie is; b) maybe, maybe not.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

sultan, you seem to be interested in the rule of law and this nation being a land of laws... except in some cases.
is this fair to say?

Perhaps you could give a few case examples and I could give you my opinion on each. That might clear things up.

[blslivewire]

blslivewire: Enlighten me please.
what is it, specifically, that you want to know?

You said I don't know what the actual story is. I'm sure all of us are on t he edge of our seats awaiting your clarification and insight..

[west coast orange and black]

sultan, look no further than your notion that "if they've done nothing wrong, then why worry about what gets leaked?" you continued that only those who are guilty of wrongdoing, those who have something to hide would object to the leaking... even though leaking grand jury testimony is against the law.

frankly, i am a bit surprised that more citizens are not up in arms that the terms of our civil rights seem to have been written in disappearing ink.

[west coast orange and black]

blslivewire: Enlighten me please.

what is it, specifically, that you want to know?

blslivewire: You said I don't know what the actual story is. I'm sure all of us are on t he edge of our seats awaiting your clarification and insight.

more condescension.
and, again, what exactly, is it that you want to know? the story has many players, many plots. i have addressed several of your inaccuracies; which others do you want cleared up?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

sultan, look no further than your notion that "if they've done nothing wrong, then why worry about what gets leaked?" you continued that only those who are guilty of wrongdoing, those who have something to hide would object to the leaking... even though leaking grand jury testimony is against the law.

frankly, i am a bit surprised that more citizens are not up in arms that the terms of our civil rights seem to have been written in disappearing ink.

Cleverly spinning the argument full circle and drawing the correlation that fits your idea doesn't negate the original point. Truth should be the goal. Hiding that truth doesn't do any good. If you have nothing to hide, then why worry.

I'm actually half-yankin' your chain, WC. That is the law and it should be adhered to, but still... ;)

[west coast orange and black]

with no need to half-yank your chain, sultan, and without emoticon, your argument is this:
"If you have nothing to hide, then why worry?"

what other rights are you willing to toss overboard? how 'bout unreasonable search and siezure?
if you have nothing to hide...

[Sultan_1895-1948]

with no need to half-yank your chain, sultan, and without emoticon, your argument is this:
"If you have nothing to hide, then why worry?"

what other rights are you willing to toss overboard? how 'bout unreasonable search and siezure?
if you have nothing to hide...

Apples and oranges.

[west coast orange and black]

slippery slope.
i take your answer to mean that you would not voluntarily begin to allow rights of yours to be arbitrarily taken away. good man, sultan.

[ESPNFan]

slippery slope.
i take your answer to mean that you would not voluntarily begin to allow rights of yours to be arbitrarily taken away. good man, sultan.

I agree with West Coast here. I said the same thing for years about the persecution and unfair taxation of cigarette smokers. If you let the government begin to legislate personal behavior or in this case disrupt your rights, they're not going to stop at just that.

But on the other hand sometimes things need to get out into the open before they will ever get addressed. I feel that this leeked testimony helped accelerate baseball into addressing its PED problem. Leaking the testimony was wrong but ultimately it was needed to start to right a much larger problem.

[blslivewire]

I agree with West Coast here. I said the same thing for years about the persecution and unfair taxation of cigarette smokers. If you let the government begin to legislate personal behavior or in this case disrupt your rights, they're not going to stop at just that.

.

I'm fine with this as long as smokers forfeit their rights to recieve any government funded healthcare or any private insurance that also insures non smokers.