Wow! Greg Anderson must have some incredible evidence that will exonorate Bonds!

[joeybee12]

Come on, why else wouldn't he testify? If you could clear a person's name, wouldn't you rush to do so? If you could refute the prosecution's case easily, wouldn't you jump at the chance? Here is one of your best buddies who is being railroaded by the Feds, and all you have to do is just say a few words and this just all goes away!

So, for all you Bonds-haters just think about that. Because NOT testifying will clear the man you hold near and dear to your heart.

Think about it. I obviously haven't.

[TZ]

1. hehe.

:popcorn:

[MrSlayer]

2. Money talks.

And thus Anderson does not.

[madinmaryland]

3. cboy is prepping his testimony, and his wife,

upton is also planning hers.

:hide:

[Upton]

4. Greg Anderson is to be admired

without his testimony the government's prosecution of Bonds is possibly irreparably damaged...as without Anderson's corroboration the judge will not allow in critical evidence.

The government has gone after Anderson's wife and his mother in law, he has done several stints in jail..still he refuses to aid the government in the persecution of his friend. Would it be that we all should be made of such strong character.

[TZ]

5. Sorry.

I don't think covering up for a liar and ones gravy train is anything to be admired. Strength of character, no...more like he knows where his bread is buttered.

[Upton]

6. Are you this skeptical of everyone's motives

or only the friends of people you dislike?

Edit: Anderson and Bonds have known each other since middle school...I think there's much more than just money at play here.

[hughee99]

8. Why admired?

Anderson should come forward and tell the truth. If the truth is that Barry Bonds didn't know anything about steroids, then he should come forward and say so. If Barry really doesn't know anything about taking steroids, then Anderson should come forward and stick up for his long time friend and tell the truth. At the very least, it wouldn't hurt Bonds' case at all to have Anderson come forward and say Barry didn't know anything, AND as an added bonus, Anderson would get to sleep in his own bed.

Why won't he come forward and tell everyone that Barry doesn't know anything about taking steroids? Maybe he's just one of those "Bonds Haters" you speak of. He could come forward and tell everyone about Bonds innocence, but he refuses to do so.

[cboy4]

9. LOL. Yea Anderson is a Bonds hater alright.

You talk just like one of the weasely deputy AG's.

[madinmaryland]

11. Sheesh, Greg, take a chill pill.

[hughee99]

15. Anderson could come forward and help his innocent friend

but he won't. How exactly can taking the stand and saying that Barry doesn't know anything about steroids aid the persecution of his friend?

[cboy4]

16. He's standing on principle. He refused to get involved in this

nonsense from the beginning and he's continuing to take that stand, which is that he won't take the stand.

Barry doesn't need his testimony anyway.

The lack of evidence the government will be allowed to introduce is shockingly pathetic.

It's why they're desperately getting Bonds' personal shopper to testify.

It has become a hilarious failure of the American justice system.

[hughee99]

17. So he's standing on principle but sitting in jail

rather than just spending a short time on the stand to say Barry doesn't know anything, and then go home?

[cboy4]

19. Standing on principle is a powerful feeling that's difficult

to describe if you're not used to it.

It makes you feel good. I'm sure you've experienced the feeling of standing on principle.

How could Anderson live with himself if he caved after all that he's been through, which includes one year in prison?

[hughee99]

21. I wonder if he'll feel stupid

to know that all he had to do was come forward and say Barry didn't know anything, and he could have avoided prison altogether?

[cboy4]

23. No, he'll feel smart knowing by refusing to testify, he can't

be questioned about evidence that can be mistaken by a jury as fact.

By not testifying, the judge has ruled it is not admissible.

He knows what he's doing.

[hughee99]

26. So basically, what your saying is that

he doesn't trust that the jury will correctly interpret the evidence, and his refusal to testify will prevent the jury from getting "confused"?

[cboy4]

27. Well again, his primary reason is standing on principle

and not being forced to testify against his friend, under a hostile government environment.

But his decision to stand on principle is reinforced every second by what you just laid out. Yes.

[MrSlayer]

22. He can't.

If I'm reading this right, the only way the judge will let the test results and other things be admitted as evidence is if this guy testifies. He can't show up to help him because if he does, the evidence can be used against BB. He won't be helping him if he shows up. It's probably much more worth his while to dummy up and take the contempt charge.

[hughee99]

24. The way I'm reading it...

the only way it can be admitted is if Anderson comes forward and corroborates it. If this evidence is truly false, fabricated, or otherwise irrelevant (like if Anderson says "I don't know anything about that stuff"), then it's still inadmissible, unless the prosecution could prove that Anderson was lying.

[MrSlayer]

31. In order for him to deny it, it has to be allowed.

I don't believe he can go to the judge without the jury there and just say "This is all bullshit" and the judge goes "ok, the evidence is inadmissible" and he goes home. The evidence would have to be admitted for him to deny it and he would have to be cross examined. By not showing up, the evidence is not presented and he gets charged with contempt and sits in jail while Bonds is found not guilty. He serves the time and gets paid. The system at it's finest.

Anderson is willing to stand in contempt, I do not believe he's willing to perjure himself.







Edit:punctuation

[hughee99]

32. I was under the impression that during a hearing without the jury present

the prosecution was told they could not present this evidence unless they could provide someone who could corroborate it. If they could provide such a person, they would probably have to meet with the judge beforehand, where the judge would confirm this. Anderson answering questions, though, does provide the prosecution the opportunity to get him to say something that might open the door to get the evidence admitted.

[PRETZEL]

33. I think that's what the judge would like

SAN FRANCISCO — The judge presiding over Barry Bonds’s perjury case said on Tuesday that she would like Greg Anderson, Bonds’s former trainer, to appear in court before the trial begins on March 2 to determine if he will testify.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/sports/baseball/18bonds.html?ref=sports

[cboy4]

34. It's really a mute point....he's not testifying so the evidence

remains non-admissible.

[hughee99]

35. My point was that the defense can't introduce the evidence

just because he testifies, so he could testify (if he wanted to) and the evidence could still be non-admissible. It's only irrelevant if you're not interested in discussing the motivations of Anderson, but since that seems to be the major theme of this thread, I guess it is relevant.

These days, it's good to see someone stand by their principle rather than take the easy way out. I salute you, Greg Anderson, for following in the great tradition of those who were willing to suffer the legal consequences for making a principled stand, like Judith Miller and Scooter Libby.

[cboy4]

36. There's nothing wrong with protecting a friend .. especially

if it's a ridiculous bullshit charge that can't be proved.

[hughee99]

38. I agree...

and Anderson is protecting himself at the same time. If he were to testify for the prosecution, I'm absolutely sure the defense council would have no problem destroying his credibility. If he were to testify for the defense, I think it's likely that the prosecution could do the same. In either case testifying doesn't help him personally, and I'm skeptical that anything he says against Bonds would really hurt the defense anyway.

One thing that would hurt Bonds case, though, would to have the jury see all of this evidence. By not testifying, he doesn't run the risk of accidentally saying something that would then allow the prosecution to enter the evidence. A juror sitting in the deliberation room asking "How the hell didn't he know he was on steroids in 2003 if he tested positive 3 times in '01 and '02?" is not what the defense wants to see.

I understand why he's doing it and it's a smart legal strategy, no doubt, but call me old fashioned, I'd rather see the truth come out.

[cboy4]

40. Well if you understand why he's doing it, why have you been

acting so baffled as to why he's not going to testify? lol

Oh that's right, you want to see the truth come out.

But that's not the way defense lawyers handle strategy.

You attempt to suppress the other side's discovery, and control everything your client says and how he proceeds.

You may want to see everything introduced, but smart lawyers (and a smart client) will prevent you from experiencing that.

[hughee99]

42. I understand why he doesn't want to testify...

It doesn't mean I agree with it. Naturally, it's a good defense strategy to suppress everything that could be damaging to your client, but I'd prefer to see all the evidence presented. If all the evidence is presented and Bonds is found not guilty, then IMHO, justice has been served, and Bonds can go about trying to reclaim his good name.

In the end, though, many people will still see him as a cheater. He hit a lot of home runs while taking steroids, the fact that he MAY not have known he was taking them may make him a tragic figure to some. If he really didn't know he was on steroids, I'd feel bad for him. If he wins this case, without presenting all the evidence, then it will simply fuel the Bonds haters. Legally, a win is a win, but from a PR/image standpoint, many will remember him first as the "steroid guy" first and the all time HR king second.

[cboy4]

44. The Bonds haters can be fueled all they want....Barry no longer

has to be subjected to the hatred he experienced in stadiums outside of the Bay Area.

And so their power has been taken away.

Bonds haters can gripe all they want, but what's done is done. Opinions will never be changed. He is the home run king in the eyes of San Francisco Giants fans, and that's all that matters to us.

He's a private citizen now. He's rich enough that he doesn't have to worry about doing anything but going to the beach once he's acquitted.

I'm sure he'll purchase Greg Anderson a nice mansion somewhere as a thank you for being such a loyal friend.

[hughee99]

45. If all that matters is that he is the home run king

in the eyes of Giants fans, then why does any of this matter at all?

If my long time friend was giving me steroids for years without my knowledge and created all these legal problems for me, I probably wouldn't be so forgiving as to buy him a house. Barry is a true humanitarian.

[cboy4]

46. You don't know that Anderson was giving Bonds steroids

without his knowledge anymore than I do.

[hughee99]

47. Agreed...

It could be that Anderson was giving him steroids WITH his knowledge. :)

All I KNOW was that Anderson plead guilty to distributing steroids ("the cream" and "the clear" among them), that he was Barry's personal trainer, that Barry admitted to taking a "clear" substance and using a "cream" at Anderson's recommendation, and that according to reports, Barry tested positive 3 times for illegal substances.

I don't KNOW that the cream and the clear that Barry was taking from a steroid distributer (who was helping Barry to become stronger) was THE "cream" and THE "clear". I also don't know that if it was steroids, that Barry was ignorant of that fact.

However, if my contention was that I wasn't taking steroids, and steroids were found in my system, the first person I'd look at would be my personal trainer who plead guilty to distributing steroids and was giving me to substances that match the description of known steroids. And I'd be pissed. Again, though, I don't know, I'm just projecting.

[Upton]

37. The comparison

to Libby and Miller is unwarranted. I notice you have had nothing to say about the raid by an estimated 20 federal agents on Anderson's mother in law's house last month. I guess government intimidation is okay with you.

[hughee99]

39. The comparison to Libby and Miller is DEAD ON

Both took a "principled" stand. In Miller's case, she felt that the government coerced Libby into signing a waiver allowing her to testify. I guess government intimidation is okay with you when it's directed toward people you don't like.

[Upton]

41. On the contrary

I've never said government intimidation is okay..under any circumstances. However, you and the other Bonds haters have been noticeably quiet when it comes to the raid and IRS investigations into Anderson's wife and mother in law....I haven't heard a peep.

Well you join me now and condemn those government intimidation tactics as well?

[hughee99]

43. Yes I will...

And it still doesn't change my opinion of Greg Anderson.

[A-Long-Little-Doggie]

48. PSA

"moot"

:hi:

[madinmaryland]

49. ..

Many of us here would like to see some of his stuff "muted"!!

:hi:

[cboy4]

25. Exactly.

He knows what he's doing, as I've already said.

[madinmaryland]

10. Thanks, Nicole.

[cboy4]

7. Yea, I'm sure that's what the prosecution would like to say

in front of the jury.

It's sad for them that too, is also inadmissible!

Is there anything they have that is admissible? :rofl:

[cboy4]

12. Here's a photo of Anderson helping Barry with weight

training.

It's how he achieved his tremendous power, in combination with his gifted bat speed.

[Upton]

18. Remember Barry's great hand eye coordination too

steroids don't give you that...but don't let the Bonds haters know, they don't want to hear it.

[cboy4]

20. Yea, that of course is the root cause of bat speed.

And you're right .. if it was juice, .. every player who took steroids would hit 73 homers in one season.

How else can it be explained?

[cboy4]

13. Here's Greg after laughing at the judge and the government

attorneys.

[cboy4]

14. And here's the champion

[madinmaryland]

28. How many world series championships does your champion have, Greg?

:shrug:

[madinmaryland]

30. Goodnight, Greg. And say goodnight to Mrs. Anderson for me also!

:hi:

[flvegan]

29. Wow! How much more time and money can we waste chasing ghosts?

Fuck all, let it go. Who fucking cares who took what?

[joeybee12]

50. So, I will post here to get to 50 and officially start the flame!

Come on, if it's not Barry's urine sample, all Anderson has to do is get on the stand and say I don't know who's it is...clear his buddy. Then again, if he lies about that...oh yeah, it would be a lie.

[madinmaryland]

51. It's been a flamefest since post #1

:hi:

Strange twist of lies, isn't it!

[Upton]

52. There is no question

that the prosecution has sought to intimidate Anderson and his family, all so they can continue their persecution of Bonds.

Why is government intimidation okay with the Bonds haters?