Attention lawyers of Greater Boston: if Bob Ryan ever shows up in your jury pool, have him excluded for cause:
By indicating that she will very likely exclude prosecutorial evidence that would have been very damning to the case against the beleaguered slugger, she has done right by our system, I suppose. That’s the sort of Constitutionally driven protection you or I would want if you or I were being hounded by the feds for some alleged transgression, especially if the upshot of it all would be hard time. So Barry Bonds, as odious, smug, arrogant, and, I’m sure most baseball fans outside of San Francisco would agree, guilty as he is, still has a right to a fair and proper hearing, according to the laws of our land.
OK, Ryan is joking here. Probably. This one is a little less easy to laugh off:
A good defense lawyer doesn’t have to believe in the innocence of his or her client in order to put on a competent, perhaps even brilliant, defense. Some lawyers really are motivated by the touching notion that even the worst elements in our society deserve a stout defense. It also helps if the client can be viewed as a walking, talking ATM machine. I rather doubt Barry’s barristers are working pro bono.
I appreciate how easy a target a high-powered defense lawyer can be, but you know, the profit motive and the belief in our Constitution aren’t mutually-exclusive concepts, Bob.
In any event, I’d be curious to see how much actual, you know, evidence Bob Ryan has pored over and how closely he’s read the jury instructions delivered by the judge prior to reaching his verdict. Wait, no evidence has been admitted and no jury instructions offered yet? Ryan is spouting off half-cocked about something he knows little about? Ryan is allowing his personal feelings and information that won’t be presented in court to convict Barry Bonds of a crime?
I, for one, am shocked.