Sports In the Courts Blog : New York Attorneys & Lawyers Specializing in Sports Law & Legal Analysis

After years of delays and appeals, Barry Bonds’ criminal trial for allegedly lying to a federal grand jury will begin on Monday.

Anyway, the threshold question for the Bonds trial is whether 52 equals 1?

We know, once again, that Bonds’ trainer and presumed steroids mastermind, Greg Anderson, will not testify for the prosecution and will remain in jail. Without the benefit of Anderson’s critical testimony, the prosecution may call 52 other witnesses to fill in the blanks. The government will call former players, Bonds’ personal assistant and even his old girl friend to present mostly circumstantial evidence of his guilt.

While the amount of evidence from multiple sources can be compelling, the prosecutors will be left to wonder how strong their case would have been if they had the one person who could testify that he gave Bonds steroids, Bonds knew what he was taking, and he lied to a grand jury about it. That testimony and that testimony alone, would be sufficient proof beyond a reasonable doubt to gain a conviction of the home run champ.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

On Tuesday, Judge Illston denied Barry Bonds' motion to exclude a recorded conversation between Stevie Hoskins, Bonds' childhood friend and assistant, and Greg Anderson, Bonds' former trainer that took place in the Giants locker room in 2003. Hoskins recorded the conversation without Anderson's knowledge, and claims he did so to convince Bonds' father that Barry was using steroids. In the conversation, Anderson discussed techniques to avoid infections when injecting a substance, referring specifically to Bonds, and later stated that he created a substance that is undetectable. Anderson said to Hoskins, "you can take it the day of and pee and it comes up with nothing."

Judge Illston found that these statements made by Anderson could be statements made against his own interests, which is an exception to the rules of evidence that prohibit hearsay. Therefore, even though Anderson will not testify at trial, parts of the recorded statement could be played to the jury, with the caveat that the government must first lay a foundation at trial that the substances Anderson referred to were illegal at the time. If they weren't illegal, the statements would not be against Anderson's interests and therefore inadmissible hearsay.

Both sides were also instructed to confer and come to an agreement as to what the jury will be told about Greg Anderson's absence.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Yesterday, former Red Sox and Yankee star pitcher entered a plea of not guilty to federal perjury and obstruction of Congress charges. This story was widely reported but little was mentioned about what happens with Clemens' case between now and the April 5, 2011 trial date.

Well, it may not be front page news but the defense now gets to conduct document discovery from the prosecution. Until this moment, the defense likely possessed very few official reports held by the government, but this is about to radically change.

Clemens' defensive team is basically entitled to a copy of the prosecutor's file. This means the defense will now have access to investigative reports, police reports, witness statements, and grand jury testimony. This information is critical for the defense lawyers to develop their plan of attack against the government's case. However, these documents should also go a long way in showing how strong the prosecution's case against the Rocket may be.

We know Clemens has turned down a plea bargain that didn't carry jail time. After Roger reviews the "care package" he is about to get from the Feds, I wonder if he will have any second thoughts. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Well, its been less then a day since former New York Yankee and Boston Red Sox star pitcher, Roger Clemens, was indicted on 15 different counts of perjury, obstructing the Congress of the United States and interfering with a Congressional investigation and already Clemens' defense team is putting out a lot of questionable information (an some usual nonsense). So let's do a little legal housekeeping.

First, although every criminal defense attorney says it (and the Clemens team is no exception), an indictment is not "meaningless" and not "proof of nothing." A felony indictment is proof that a grand jury found "reasonable cause" to believe that a crime was committed and Clemens is the one who did it. While this is not the "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" needed for a conviction, it is all the proof required to bring Clemens to trial. An indictment is not "meaningless" because it becomes the "charging instrument" to which Clemens must enter a plea of guilty or not guilty.

Second, Clemens' lawyers are suggesting that this prosecution is on something of a "witch hunt" or saga against their client. Whether Clemens is guilty or not will not be decided for a long time, but make no mistake, the Democratic AND Republican Congressman who heard Clemens' testimony and his former trainer, Brian McNamee's testimony believed Clemens had lied. In a era when the political parties can't agree on the day of the week, the Congressional request for the US Attorney to investigate Clemens for perjury came for BOTH parties.

Lastly, Clemens is tweeting about his innocence. In my opinion, this is beyond reckless and shows that Clemens is out of control. The government is collecting everything he is writing and will try to use any mistake he may make against him.

Roger, this is what you have lawyers for, stop tweeting, facebooking and talking and start getting ready for the fight of your life.  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Earlier this afternoon a grand jury returned an indictment against Roger Clemens for lying to Congress during his disastrous testimony. It appears that Clemens may face 15 to 21 months and additional fines if convicted. We expect Clemens through his lawyers will enter a plea of not guilty to the charges.

During his testimony before Congress, Clemens seemed like an out of control client who didn't or wouldn't listen to his lawyers. Unfortunately for Clemens, his former trainer (Brian McNamee) told a more believable story and brought some physical evidence to show Clemens' steroid use.

Maybe he will listen now and find a way not to misremember the truth. We will have much more on this case and we will follow it closely.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Brian McNamee testified for over 2 1/2 hours today in front of a Grand Jury.  The investigation to decide whether Roger Clemens will face charges for perjury is coming to an end.  Star witness BrianMcNamee's testimony could mean that prosecutor's may be seeking perjury charges against Clemens in the coming days.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link