[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Jay, I think a perjury case against Bonds is much easier to prove than one against Palmiero. While Raffy claimed under oath that he had never done 'roids, his positive test occurred after his testimony just leaving circumstantial proof that he had actually lied before Congress. I'm also unsure how many independent witnesses exist against Raffy who could testify that at the time he testified before Congress he was doing steroids. Bonds, on the other hand, while not having a positive test has a plethora of witnesses and documentary proof that suggest that he was doing steroids at the time and before he testified before the Grand Jury that he had never knowingly taken 'roids. Also, for what it's worth, the baseball hearings before Congress - while causing all that testified to take an oath - were not nearly as serious as the Balco/Conte Grand Jury. In addition, Bonds has the tax/money laundering criminal issues that may also be part of the same indictment should charges ever be brought. My general feeling is, as a defense attorney, that lying under oath during a Congressional hearing on steroids in baseball hardly shakes the foundation of our society; but evading taxes, laundering money and lying before a Grand Jury does have a grave impact on society. That being said, in my opinion, unless the Feds have the goods on Bonds with the tax and money laundering issues, no indictment will result against Bonds because I think the Feds were ultimately not stymied by his purported perjury in the Grand Jury (everyone they wanted to indict was indicted it would seem) and Bonds surely is being punished in ways that no ordinary perjurer would be, i.e., his treatment by fans, press, etc.