Barry Bonds indicted for allegedly lying under oath

Home run king Barry Bonds, the owner of the most sacred record in sports and once considered a lock for the Hall of Fame, was indicted Thursday for allegedly lying under oath to a grand jury about his steroid use.

Federal prosecutors charged the 43-year-old slugger with perjury and obstruction of justice in a 10-page indictment filed in United States District Court in San Francisco, four years after investigators raided the Bay Area Laboratory Cooperative and Bonds testified that he never knowingly used steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs.

According to the indictment, investigators obtained evidence that indicated Bonds, baseball's career leader in home runs with 762, had tested positive for anabolic steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs in their Sept. 3, 2003, raid at BALCO's Burlingame, Calif., offices and a subsequent raid on trainer Greg Anderson's home. Bonds, however, denied knowingly using steroids when he was confronted with evidence when he testified before the grand jury on Dec. 4, 2004.

"There's this number associated on a document with your name, and corresponding to Barry B. on the other document, and it does have these two listed anabolic steroids as testing positive with it," an unnamed prosecutor had asked Bonds, according to the indictment. "Do you follow my question?"

"I follow where you're going, yeah," Bonds responded.

"So I guess I got to ask the question again, I mean, did you take steroids? And specifically this test is in November of 2000," the prosecutor continued. "So, I'm going to ask you, in the weeks and months leading up to November 2000, were you taking steroids?"

"No."
Barry Bonds indicted for allegedly lying under oath

Should be interesting to see how this turns out.

Have a good one!:jointsmile:

Steroids or no steroids, as someone back in the day put it, he still had to "hit a round ball with a round bat onto a square field". That takes more coordination than steroids will give you.

His record being broken may be under some kind of "grandfather clause". If Pete Rose had broken the hit record, before gambling by players and coaches was made illegal, he may be in the Hall of Fame.

I guess the real question is, who gives a shit whether or not he took steroids? I guess I find it hard to take it seriously when baseball players are asked to testify in court about playing a game. For all those that think he doesn't deserve his record, or should be blackmarked with an asterisk, piss off. You take some 'roids and try and hit a 95mhp pitch. The man practiced his ass to be able to do what he can. (One way he learned how to hit better was by swinging without a bat, but with a glove instead, trying to catch the ball, thereby developing the crucial hand-eye coordination it takes to hit something that's past you in four-tenths of a second.) Steroids were legal in Hank Aaron's day, so who's to say he didn't use/abuse them as well? And can you really fault Bonds, even if he did use steroids, for wanting to be the best that he could be? Yes, it's "cheating", but where do you draw the line in the pursuit of perfection? And yes, I think Pete Rose deserves to be in the Hall.

I know he has to have the natural talent and determination and practice but to me if he used sterriods that was his edge it doesn't make him a great hitter, but it gives him that extra power that extra bit. Even say turning a long fly into a short homer, and wether it did that or not it still tarnishes the accomplishment because that thought is there, that possibilty is with it and a clean unmarked record should only be given to people who did not mark there own career and tarnish the image of baseball, that there record will represent, by illegaly and beyond that not allowed by MLB increasing his abilities beyond that of his natural talent no matter how much talent or practice he has and effort he has putt in, in then end he cheated. He cheated the fans his competitors the legends. If this is not allways recognized along with the record what is the message we are sending about performance enhancing drugs? Don't get caught until after the record, do we really want to watch "super" athletes destroy there health to dominate the competition. To me it's like taking the best player on Madden and jacking his stats up, if your friend beat you like this wouldn't you say he cheated? IMO I don't think we should completely remove his record or not acknowledge it because it still does require great talent and determination but I believe it should not be outright rewarded because it does still in a way endorse his behavior and I enjoy seeing the best of the best play without the use of harmful performance enhancers.

I seem to be alone right now in my opinion.

Its about time!!! I'd like to see him in jail myself but that might be a little much.

This indictment isn't about baseball records or whether Bonds is a good player with or without steroids. The indictment is about lying under oath. If you are sworn in to testify before a grand jury and you give false testimony under oath, then you have committed perjury and will be prosecuted. That's what this is about.

As for the question about whether his record should stand, if it is proven he used steroids (which everyone knows he did, just not proven yet), the record should be removed. It's like every other form of cheating and should not be tolerated. Of course Bonds is incredibly talented --- everyone at the professional level is talented, and he is one of the best. But that is totally beside teh point. If you allow any form of cheating to contiue, the records have no meaning. They need to strip a few players of everything they have earned and ban a few for life if they want to get a handle on this stuff. Otherwise, just put an asterisk next to the whole sport and admit it doesn't follow its own rules.

At very least there needs to be an asterisk next to his numbers but I'm fine with stripping him of his records.

He was a dick to the fans and to the media, he cheated, and now he is going to be outed once and for all. Karma :jointsmile:

Cherry popper,

What an AMAZING Statement. :eek:

"Yes...it's cheating....but where do you draw the line? " How about at not cheating? I do hope you are joking because if you don't know where the line is by now you should be worried about more than baseball.

Ps.....Who else besides me thinks that "perfection" includes NOT cheating?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CultureCherryPopper

I guess I find it hard to take it seriously when baseball players are asked to testify in court about playing a game.

---

His court testimony was not about playing the game. His court testimony was in relation to a criminal investigation of Balco. He was a witness, not a defendent. Now he is a defendent in a perjury and obstruction of justice case, which is also not about playing the game.

So the legal issues are separate from the fact that he is a cheater. No one goes to jail for cheating at baseball.

I'm really starting to like you dragonrider... ;)

Thanks! And I agree 100% that "perfection" requires not cheating.