Contact Us

Vivid Seats

Google Search Steroid Nation

Google List

  • Count

EMail Tips

Notes

  • http://www.blogcatalog.com/
  • eXTReMe Tracker
  • SportsBlogs.org -- The People's Sports Network
  • Blogarama - The Blog Directory
  • Top Sports Blogs

Tip Jar

Change is good

Tip Jar

February 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28    
Blog powered by Typepad

« Does anyone in pro wrestling live past 45? WWE's Brian 'Crush' Adams dead at 43 | Main | Steroids aren't the only problem in public health »

08/14/2007

Comments

Charles Slavik

"According to The San Jose News, Bonds' old attorney, -- Michael Rains (maybe feeling some jealousy?"

Explain to me why Rains would feel any jealousy that Bonds retained civil rights lwayers. Rains is a criminal defense lawyer, whose plate is rather full I'm sure.

The others are civil rights attorneys.

Attorneys specialize in narrow areas of the law. Rains may feel he has little or no competence in this arena.

Are you sure it's not some jealousy or envy or bias that you are showing?

GRG

I don't remember what exact neurons were firing when I wrote that Rains might be jealous. Probably he isn't. However, I did think it was odd that Rains gave away some of the game plan about going after Schilling. It is routine for an attorney to give away another attorney's game plan?

Good point about the specialization.

Jealosy on our part? Of Bonds' attorney? Not unless he is really rich.

Envy? Of Bonds' attorney? Of Bonds' athletic ability. (sure).

Bias? Sure we have bias. Just that we aint telling :-)

thanks for the comment.

Charles Slavik

Sorry, hanging out with the young people too much and adopting their IM lexicon...JK = Just Kidding.

I'm not sure we know their game plan as much as that they are warming up in the bullpen ready to take the field.

I often wondered why he wasn't more aggressive in this regard, as Armstrong and Clemens have been in the past, and thought "well, maybe he's waiting until he breaks (back then it was if) the record."

I remember thinking that it didn't have much of a chance of happening, but different strokes...I suppose.

He and his attorneys may just go after the adulterer comments and leave anything remotely close to PED comments alone, who knows?

He's given sworn testimony on his PED use in the past (leaked grand jury testimony), his accusers, specifically Schilling, have no direct knowledge of PED use by Barry, that I'm aware of, or that they've cited.

I'm not sure if in a libel case, they would be allowed to call other witnesses (such as Greg Anderson) to rebut Barrys denial or if the burden lies soley on how they arrived at the substance of their comments given what was "known" at the time.

It would be seem to be hard for Schilling to defend his comments after he was almost universally condemned for being erroneous and out of line in making them. And he did do a quick "moon-walk" bactrack afterwards. Not sure how much that would play in to proving subsequent damage to Bonds.

It could just be Barry in effect drawing a line in the sand and saying to his detractors, "From now on, watch what you say." And we don't waste a minute of court time on it.

Although yes, I would watch it.

Anonymous

The worst thing Barry Bonds could do is listen to Gary Radnich and others who already have him tried and convicted, based on allegations, and no proof, nor Barry admitting to anything. I’m not even a fan of Barry Bonds, and think he should have stayed on the field for the fan party held to celebrate his record breaking Home Run; however that’s a separate issue, and it’s plain to see that the Government is using the tired old Martha Stewart ploy of acquisition of perjury with the hopes that Barry Bonds will now recant what he testified to earlier at the Grand Jury. Barry needs to keep consistent with his earlier Grand Jury statements to the tee, and he’ll be home in time for dinner. If he changes one thing he said previously, than he’ll be getting three hots and a cot for a long long time. Remember… the government and others can think what they want about weather Barry took steroids or not, and I’m not even sure if he did; however proving whether he did or not, is quite another thing. If Barry where taking various legal vitamin regiments while maintaining that he was not aware that he was taking any illegal substances, than it’s game over for the governments case, as it’s weak, weak, weak, weak, weak, to the point of being almost laughable; however it’s humorous to see how the media is buying into the governments trap and treating Barry like he lied when that’s not been proven one iota. No matter how much documentation, appointment, calendar paperwork the government has, it could apply to all the legal substance appointments that Barry and others kept, which would make his Grand Jury testimony sound, unless he were stupid enough to change it for any reason. P.S To Barry; learn some etiquette and treat your fans better, and although this fan is unable to give any legal advice, and none of the above is to be construed as such, your legal team might wish to read this post A.S.A.P. Good Luck …

The comments to this entry are closed.