If he does, how long would you guess he'll go for?
2007-11-15 11:07:30 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
That depends on the government's case and evidence. If they've got a smoking gun, they'll put him away, because Bonds is very high-profile, so nailing him is a prize, a trophy conviction.
OTOH, this may just be a lot of noisy rainmaking, and when the lawyers start kicking the tires the charges will get dropped or reduced in a few months' time.
And that's without even getting into conspiracy theories!
2007-11-15 11:16:01 · answer #1 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nope, the indictment is a joke. Just look at the facts they didn't have enough evidence and they still don't. Even if he is found guilty and he'll appeal it and more then likely win his appeal. Bonds will never set foot in a prison.
2007-11-15 20:35:03 · answer #2 · answered by Steven R 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ah, thanks David S for the heads up on the indictment. Although it's not clear at this point whether his trainer Greg Anderson ratted him out or not because of this quote from his lawyer Mark Geragos:
Anderson's attorney, Mark Geragos, said the trainer didn't cooperate with the grand jury that indicted Bonds.
"This indictment came out of left field," Geragos said. "Frankly I'm aghast. It looks like the government misled me and Greg as well, saying this case couldn't go forward without him."
It's possible Anderson ratted out Bonds without his lawyer's knowledge, but do you think it's likely? I realize he was released after the indictment was handed down, but it just seems like his lawyer would at least be clued on it if he did rat.
But you have a good point though, when an indictment is handed down by a prosecutor in the US then the preponderance of evidence is usually quite overwhelming that the defendant is guilty. With high profile cases like this, it would be ESPECIALLY true as they would need to win in the court of public opinion even if they lose the case in court. Any federal prosecutor that would attempt to indict Bonds on flimsy evidence would be committing career suicide.
Update: Okay, from everything I've read it seems Greg Anderson has NOT ratted out Bonds and the prosecutors are moving forward on the charges based on other evidence that from reading the indictment IS NOT YET KNOWN TO THE PUBLIC. The public has only the indictment to go by at the moment, which is only a transcript of pointing out where in his testimony they are accusing him of perjuring himself.
So it's going to be difficult to gauge how strong the prosecution's case is until we know WHAT CORROBORATING EVIDENCE they have, but like I stated before they would NOT have moved forward if they didn't think they had a strong case that could be successfully prosecuted in front of a San Francisco jury. They have to have more than circumstantial evidence for a judge to even GRANT a trial.
And generally speaking prosecutors are not dumb enough to risk public humiliation and their careers on such a high profile case by trying him on circumstantial evidence or a pack of lies with the exception being one idiot prosecutor in North Carolina that lost his license to practice law for the whole Duke Lacrosse fiasco.
2007-11-15 19:20:08 · answer #3 · answered by eYeDEF 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hey, eyeDEF, check the news. Anderson ratted on him. Whether he goes to jail or not depends on who he rats on.... but trust me the Feds dont waste time on indictments especially this high profile unless they have plenty enough to convict. This aint OJ with his high priced team mismatching a bunch of local yokels in LA, the Feds are all top rank, I mean if they can put away Gotti, you know Bonds is going to be a piece of cake. I bet he's hot with lipstick on!
2007-11-15 19:30:47 · answer #4 · answered by David S 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
With the lawyers he can afford, not likely. If they couldn't prove he took the steroids, how are they going to prove what he knew, or didn't know while he was or was not taking them?
2007-11-15 19:38:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i hope so, and the record should be stripped.
the sad thing is he may walk, because he's celebrity and he has the money to hire the most powerful lawyers, nothing to do with justice.
2007-11-15 19:13:39 · answer #6 · answered by Eric C 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He won't get probabation if he's convicted...He'll go to prison...He lied to the feds...and now they're pissed...
Uh...eYeDEF...He's being charged...The feds have SOMETHING on him...He failed a drug test
2007-11-15 19:18:59 · answer #7 · answered by Terry C. 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not likely, with all his money for lawyers...
"If his $hit don't stink,
You must not think!!!"
Return the record to Hammerin' Hank.
2007-11-15 19:27:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
he should, every knows hes guilty. but he like many star athletes will probably go free or get way less time than an average person
2007-11-15 19:15:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's hard to say.
But, from the beginning, it's clear that they are trying to make an example out of him.
2007-11-15 19:11:04 · answer #10 · answered by Black&Orange 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋