1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Let's discuss: Jury chosen for Bonds' trial today.

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by The Big Ragu, Mar 21, 2011.

Page 7 of 7
  1. MartinonMTV2

    MartinonMTV2 New Member

    Not found guilty is not found guilty. Very different from "we all know he is guilty." If we/they all knew that, then we'd have a string of guilty verdicts right now.

    Also, just from the 1-minute ticker, it sounds like the conviction is based on a silly rant Bonds went on.
     
    MartinonMTV2, Apr 13, 2011
    #73
  2. Spartan Squad

    Spartan Squad Well-Known Member

    I sincerely doubt Bonds gets into the hall. McGwire was better liked and I'm sure I'll get agreement that he helped to save baseball after the strike and he's not even close to getting enough votes to get into the Hall. Bonds was never really liked by the media, is despised by nearly everyone outside of the Bay Area. And I said will be, he hasn't yet but I'll be surprised if he does. He'd get my vote, but I don't have a ballot.

    And he wasn't found not guilty, the jury couldn't agree as to his guilt.
     
    Spartan Squad, Apr 13, 2011
    #74
  3. JC

    JC Well-Known Member

    and he was never half the player Bonds was. Bonds will get in.
     
    JC, Apr 13, 2011
    #75
  4. MileHigh

    MileHigh Moderator Staff Member

    It was a hung jury on the three other counts. Not found not guilty. And one of the counts was 11-1 in favor of conviction.
     
    MileHigh, Apr 13, 2011
    #76
  5. MartinonMTV2

    MartinonMTV2 New Member

    I typed: "Not found guilty."

    You typed: "Not found not guilty."

    Intentional? Unintentional? Another of the many "subtle" points here open to interpretation?

    Unquestionably not the same concept, though.
     
    MartinonMTV2, Apr 13, 2011
    #77
  6. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    I hope they don't retry. They made their point.

    Bonds owes Greg Anderson everything. The Feds couldn't introduce positive tests from 2000/2001 taken by Balco, because the judge ruled that Anderson had to testify the samples had come from Bonds for confirmation. Rather than take the stand, though, Anderson went back to jail. You have to figure that if Greg Anderson wasn't willing to spend half his life in jail for Barry Bonds, they would have gotten Bonds on the perjury charges.

    The interesting question to me is what Anderson is getting out of it. I have read he idolizes Bonds. I wonder if there has been any explicit promises made, though. If Bonds was already paying him to stay silent and go to jail for contempt, you have to figure the Feds would be all over it. I wish I knew the true story on Anderson/Bonds.
     
    The Big Ragu, Apr 13, 2011
    #78
  7. qtlaw

    qtlaw Well-Known Member

    Frankly this is why we have the best judicial system in the world, bar none. At least with respect to criminal matters. You can convict someone in the court of public opinion very easily based on the biases that everyone brings to the issue and the influences that they may be exposed to without seeing the evidence first hand.

    A jury trial though, while not perfect, brings everything down to the most basic elements, the actual documents, the actual witnesses testifying under cross-examination. There is no clearer scrutiny available than cross-examination. I believe the vast majority of Jurors really take their jobs seriously, probabaly more seriously than their jobs, they know that someone's life is on the line. For that, as a citizen I am thankful.

    Applying this to the Bonds scenario, while based on what I've seen and read I would vote differently, I applaud the jurors for making the difficult decisions and taking 4 days to deliberate.
     
    qtlaw, Apr 14, 2011
    #79
  8. Tarheel316

    Tarheel316 Well-Known Member

    It was nice to see Jeff Novitzky effectively taken down a peg.
     
    Tarheel316, Apr 14, 2011
    #80
  9. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Jeff MacGregor nails it in his column today on Bonds trial:

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=macgregor/110418
     
    Boom_70, Apr 18, 2011
    #81
  10. MartinonMTV2

    MartinonMTV2 New Member

    He made some decent points, but those were largely lost among the self-indulgent fat that clogged the arteries of that piece.
     
    MartinonMTV2, Apr 18, 2011
    #82
  11. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    Wait, you didn't learn about Omerta?
     
    Songbird, Jul 25, 2018
    #83
    LongTimeListener likes this.
Page 7 of 7
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page