Skip to content

Barry Bonds to be sentenced today

Dec 16, 2011, 10:03 AM EDT

Barry Bonds Convicted Of One Count Of Obstruction Of Justice Getty Images

Barry Bonds finds out the penalty for minor hemming and hawing today, as he will be sentenced in U.S. Federal court for his April conviction.

Most likely: probation in the form of house arrest. I’m assuming his house is pretty nice, though.  But that’s what other athletes in the BALCO case have gotten for single-count convictions. The feds want him to do hard time, but it just ain’t gonna happen.

But no matter what happens, this should serve as a lesson to all of you: don’t ramble for a minute before answering a question. Ever.

  1. Francisco (FC) - Dec 16, 2011 at 10:12 AM

    But no matter what happens, this should serve as a lesson to all of you: don’t ramble for a minute before answering a question. Ever

    Pfft. In my house I have all sorts of entertainment options. That sounds almost like a vacation, albeit unpaid. Unless it’s House Garage Arrest during winter…

  2. metalhead65 - Dec 16, 2011 at 10:23 AM

    good thing it will only be a slap on the wrist. we wouldn’t him to do any actual time for cheating then lying about it. it was not his fault the judge threw out all evidence against him on technicalities. in my book he is guitly but if you want to ignore the physical evidence alone then there is no hope for you. if he is not guilty then why was there any evidence for the judge to throw out?wait I know it was just another case of the man trying to keep him down right? pathetic excuse.

  3. WhenMattStairsIsKing - Dec 16, 2011 at 10:25 AM

    So he’ll have to stay at home…which is what he’s likely been doing the last few years anyway, considering most of the world despises him and the rest don’t know who he is.

  4. delsj - Dec 16, 2011 at 10:43 AM

    His punishment is that he will be remembered as the face of steroids in baseball, rather that one of the all-time greats. He will always be tainted. Really, you want him locked away with real criminals? For what, perjury or for cheating in baseball? Sentence him to never be allowed to leave San Fran. They enabled him they can keep him.

    • jwbiii - Dec 16, 2011 at 2:17 PM

      Bonds lives in an LA suburb. . .

  5. Old Gator - Dec 16, 2011 at 11:41 AM

    Got my popcorn. Got my extra large diet coke. Can’t wait. I bet this will be the most fun I’ve had in front of a screen since I dozed off twenty minutes into The Tree of Life.

  6. deathmonkey41 - Dec 16, 2011 at 11:49 AM

    Your government at work. Forget the skyrocketing deficit, growing unemployment lines, and countless homes being foreclosed on- let’s spend tens of millions of dollars of taxpayer money going after something no one gives a crap about. And soon they’re be in charge of healthcare. God help us all.

    • Old Gator - Dec 16, 2011 at 12:29 PM

      God’s been no help with big corporations in charge of healthcare. That’s why so many of us don’t have the basic health services available to every other civilized country on the planet, not to mention a lot of third world armpits as well. To paraphrase Judge Holden, if God had intended to intercede in the degeneracy of the US health care “system,” would he not have done so by now?

      • WhenMattStairsIsKing - Dec 16, 2011 at 2:44 PM

        Not to mention there are many Gods among many other non-Christian religions that everyone likes to ignore.

        If I get a ton of thumbs down for this, my point will be even more proof.

        Man needs to save man. Nothing else will.

  7. isujames - Dec 16, 2011 at 12:05 PM

    The best ball player ever, on steroids

  8. drewsylvania - Dec 16, 2011 at 1:27 PM

    My biggest beef with prosecution in general: At any point, nearly anyone can be prosecuted for anything. We’re all breaking laws of some kind (jaywalking, illegal downloading, etc). Which means that, often, people are prosecuted because someone WANTED to prosecute them. Which means that, if you become a target, the law will come after you when they wouldn’t normally do so.

    For example, Bonds. Does anyone seriously think that the feds would have spent so much time on this weaksauce perjury case if he’d been Mr. Anonymous Citizen From Nowhere Who Otherwise Isn’t Suspected Of Anything?

    It’s a witch hunt. And I can’t stand Bonds.

  9. nudeman - Dec 16, 2011 at 1:30 PM

    This is about as dumb of an observation as I’ve read anywhere, on any topic.

    He lied under oath. Period. He lied to the Feds.
    You do those things and you pay the price.

    • explodet - Dec 16, 2011 at 2:03 PM

      YEAH. Except for the part where he was convicted for not answering a question (which he actually did answer), not for lying.

    • cur68 - Dec 16, 2011 at 2:28 PM

      nude, like explodet says, he’s being sentenced on a pretty iffy detail. He answered a “yes” “no” question with a “no”. He took about 5 minutes of rambling to get around to answering it, but answer he did. They’re sentencing him for rambling. That’s not even a crime. That’s why a decent lawyer stops the ramble and forces the witness to make with the “yes/no”. If the witness rambles and no one stops them, who’s fault is that and when did it become a crime?

    • skipperxc - Dec 16, 2011 at 2:34 PM

      I agree in that he almost certainly is lying about knowingly taking steroids. Trouble is, the Feds couldn’t prove it — the conviction is for obstruction of justice as it relates to refusing to answer a specific question, not perjury. And the *real* problem is that he DID answer the question, so the conviction on that count is questionable at best.

      You can argue all you want about the other counts and whether he should have been acquitted or not, but this specific conviction is kind of stupid.

    • drewsylvania - Dec 16, 2011 at 3:23 PM

      Fine, nudeman…stay uninformed.

  10. ireportyoudecide - Dec 16, 2011 at 1:48 PM

    Say what you want about Bonds but taking steroids or any substance for that matter was not against the rules in baseball until 2005. Bonds may be a jerk, but he is not a cheater.

    • somejoe7777 - Dec 16, 2011 at 2:20 PM

      You are 100% wrong.

      MLB has specifically prohibited the illegal use, possession, or distribution of drugs, including the unauthorized use of prescription drugs since 1971. (Bond’s alleged abused substances were illegal drugs since they had no FDA approval).

      MLB has specifically added anabolic steroids to that prohibited list in 1991.

      The MLB player’s association accepted a collective bargaining agreement that began testing for these banned substances in 2002 (no penalties nor disclosure of results).

      Penalties for violations from the banned substance testing began in 2005.

      Any way you slice it, if Barry took the cream or the clear, he cheated by all rules in the league regardless of the testing policy or penalty policy.

      • drewsylvania - Dec 16, 2011 at 3:24 PM

        No, this whole thing is incorrect.

      • somejoe7777 - Dec 16, 2011 at 5:59 PM

        Awesome argument there, drew. Denial with no evidence whatsoever.

        Read the Mitchell report, page 25 (page 73 in the PDF). It contains exactly what I just said.

        The things that are debatable here that can be argued on both sides are:

        1. Whether Bonds took illegal substances.
        2. If he took them, whether he knowingly took them or not.
        3. Whether he lied to the grand jury.
        4. If he did, what the appropriate penalty is for that.

        The thing that is not debatable is that the drugs/substances that he allegedly took are not legal to take for an MLB player. If he took them, he broke MLB’s own rules. That is an undeniable fact.

    • jwbiii - Dec 16, 2011 at 3:13 PM

      Sorry somejoe7777, that is just not correct.

      “Not only was the performance-enhancing drug tetrahydrogestrinone (THG) not specifically banned when athletes squirted “The Clear” under their tongues to gain an edge, the testimony also indicates that the drug wasn’t categorized by the Justice Department as a steroid until January 2005, long after [BALCO] had been shuttered.”

      • somejoe7777 - Dec 16, 2011 at 3:19 PM


        1. Is it a drug (substance intended to be introduced into the body that is not an unadulterated, natural food substance)? Yes.
        2. Is it a legal drug (approved by the FDA)? No.
        3. Was is prescribed to Barry by a doctor? No. (impossible anyway, since the drug isn’t legal).

        It falls under the “specifically prohibited the illegal use, possession, or distribution of drugs, including the unauthorized use of prescription drugs” clause, which has been a rule applied to MLB players since 1971. End of story.

        It doesn’t matter that it wasn’t named by name, it doesn’t matter whether it was or wasn’t classified as a steroid or not. It was illegal for him to use, possess, or distribute it, period, and had been since 1971.

      • jwbiii - Dec 16, 2011 at 9:28 PM

        Ok, Let’s go back to your 5:59 post.
        1. No. Has anyone alleged that he took these substances after they were declared illegal? Don’t you think Nowitzki would have tried to get an indictment on drug charges if he thought he had a ghost of a chance of a conviction? No.
        2. Irrelevant.
        3. Personally, I have no idea. I will defer to the jury which heard the evidence, rather than the “excerpts” used to sell books (Lance Williams said he would not testify), and did not convict him on the perjury charges. No.
        4. $100K and 250 hours of service seems a bit steep for what he was convicted of.

        You have given the DEA an awful lot more power in your world than they have out here. Take a look at a jar of mayonnaise. Disodiumethyldiaminotetraacetic acid isn’t a drug or a natural food substance.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Wright (2958)
  2. D. Span (2496)
  3. G. Stanton (2429)
  4. J. Fernandez (2411)
  5. G. Springer (2374)
  1. Y. Puig (2279)
  2. F. Rodney (2197)
  3. M. Teixeira (2156)
  4. G. Perkins (2058)
  5. H. Olivera (1914)