U.S. v. Bonds:  Ppd.

No makeup date scheduled:

And so the Barry Bonds saga rages on. With little end in sight.

What once seemed like closure on the horizon — a perjury trial for baseball’s home run king set to begin Monday, nearly six years after the BALCO scandal first erupted — now has been put on indefinite hold.

The government announced Friday its intention to appeal pretrial rulings that would keep out significant pieces of evidence, bringing the case to a screeching halt despite Judge Susan Illston’s chastising prosecutors for even considering an appeal at the 11th hour.

The start to the trial, legal experts say, likely will be delayed several months, if not considerably longer.

My prediction: this never goes to trial. There’s no way the feds win this appeal, and if they don’t think they can win the trial now, nothing is going to change later. The appeal will be briefed and argued, Bonds will win, and the feds will drop this case.

Print Friendly
 Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Google+0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone
« Previous: Anderson to stay mum
Next: A Contrary View »


  1. Andy L said...

    Does Anderson stay free meanwhile?  I mean, he doesn’t have to sit in prison while this thing gets delayed and delayed, does he?

  2. Craig Calcaterra said...

    He’s free.  He hasn’t technically acted in contempt of court until he’s called to the stand and refuses to speak.  If he had wanted, he could have told everyone in the world that he wasn’t going to testify, and then showed up next week and sung like a bird.

  3. Aaron Moreno said...

    Well, looks like we’ll see things blow over into the baseball season, and then the case will quietly disappear.

  4. mark b said...


    Just wondering if you saw this article from Lester Munson:


    He claims this is a good move by the government and the judge should get overturned on appeal.  From everything I’ve read (not just you) this seems unlikely.  Myself, being a law student, it seems unlikely to be overturned. 

    My favorite part is how Munson doesn’t begin to discuss the value of going forward in this case.  Anyways, just curious to hear your thoughts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>