Sunday, December 16, 2007

Mitchell Report Purports To Tattle On Steroid Users; Barry Bonds Did Not Necessarily Lie

Barry Bonds is charged with not telling the truth to Congress. He was asked if he took anabolic steroids. He replied no. Now he is indicted for lying to Congress. But did he lie? Legal Pub previously predicted the "Bond's defense" when discussing Operation Raw Deal. LINK In sum, Bonds did not lie, if he took HGH. Human Growth Hormone is not an anabolic steroid. Furthermore, it was not banned until 2005 by Major League Baseball. Recently, Yankee pitcher Andy Pettitte admitted using human growth hormone while rehabbing an elbow injury. On the other hand, New York teammate Alex Rodriguez denied accusations he ever used steroids. Roger Clemens and Pettitte were both mentioned in the Thursday's Major League Baseball report on performance-enhancing drugs (Mitchell Report.) The report included information from former Yankees' trainer Brian McNamee, who served as a personal trainer to both Clemens and Pettitte until 2007. Jose Canseco was surprised to that Rodriguez's name was not on the list of players in the Mitchell Report. Ironically, neither steroids nor human growth hormone are illegal if prescribed by a physician for legitimate reasons. In Pettitte's case, if a physician legitimately prescribed steroids or HGH to speed up recovery while a player was disabled, no law was broken. When non licensed people distribute sterioids or HGH, the government calls such people drug dealers. Should HGH or Steroids be illegal? The vast majority of comments to the Operation Raw Deal article seem to indicate no. LINK. How are steroids more harmful then tobacco or alcohol products? Has America reached the point where individuals no longer have a right to choose what they put in their own body? Update 5-13-08 Barry Bonds was indicted for fourteen counts of Perjury and one count of obstruction of justice. He will have to face trial unless he enters a plea! He is still innocent until otherwise proven. Update 4-8-11: We've held up on an update because you know we hate to say we told you so.... Barry Bonds case is in the hands of the jury after the Defense chose to call no witnesses. Closing statements aren’t evidence and typically they are not all that persuasive in most cases. But they do give the audience an outline of what the lawyer's think was important during the evidence phase of trial. The prosecutor’s theme was “all he had to do was tell the truth.” But did the prosecution prove by the evidence the basis for the alleged lie? With perhaps the exception of the single charge relating to injections, did anyone testify that “Barry lied?" If Barry Bonds was a rampant steroids user who knew that what he was doing was wrong, then why didn't someone testify as such in the courtroom? The defense argued that the prosecution was a vendetta against Bonds. Prosecutio witnesses were labelled as ex-friends or scorned lovers. Bonds was definitely intended to be "made and example." Even if Bonds was not completely truthful, a guilty verdict may seem excessive given the relative insignificance of performance enhancing drugs. What real significance is there that a baseball player took performance enhancing drugs when thousands of weekend weight lifters regularly take supplements without any real threat of prosecution? BALCO was already punished. Bonds' testimony did not negatively effect the prosecution of the "dealers." Kathy Hoskins testified she saw Bonds injected. But that alone does not prove that Bonds knew the injection contained an illegal steroid. In the end, was this trial much to do about nothing? Is it really so important to destroy every American sports hero? The jury will tell the world real soon.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

George J. Mitchell says that his report depicted only a sliver of the steroid use in baseball. Why not let it go? Does not congress have more important things to do then chase steroid users?

Anonymous said...

It is just a witch hunt. They run away from important issues and pick on athletes and body builders.

Much of the problem with steroid use is a result of lies.

The government said they don't work.

Wrong, they do.

The government said you would die of cancer.

No statistics show that steroid users have significantly higher cancer rates.

The government said it would cause roid rage.

Not exactly. Many aids victims were treated with steroids and no such out bursts were reported.

Bottom line, there was much misinformation right from the start.Should teens use steroids. No. It will stunt their natural growth. But with all the other misinformation that has been told, why will teens believe the warnings?

muscleman said...

Hot girl. Bet she is 100% natural!

Ms. Calabaza said...

Ditto with anonymous #1: "Does not Congress have more important things to do than chase steroid users?"

In answer to your question LP: I want less government intrusion in my life. I would decriminalize steroids and let the baseball commission deal with it (after all, they've known all along).

With re: Barry Bonds
My take is he is picked on because he is so nasty with the media and they can't stand him. He's no worse than many others.

Anonymous said...

Iron Mike said...


Got to go with Ms. C. on this one. No logical reason that steroids are not treated like tobacco or alcohol.

As for Bonds, he painted a target on his own forehead by being an ass. Consequently, he is the scapegoat being made an example of for all to see.

Iron Mike

Anonymous said...

Can I look like her with some HGH?









Old Woman in a Shoe

blond bombshell said...

Wonder if some HGH would energize the old broom stick?


Shell

Did You Stop to Think? said...

It's Bonds fault for not becoming President before he sat before congress... I agree w/George; it's good to see congress tackling the big issues that affect us all...

Legal Pub said...

President Bush said Friday that baseball players and owners must take seriously the Mitchell Report on steroid use, but cautioned against jumping to conclusions about the individuals named.

"My hope is that this report is a part of putting the steroid era of baseball behind us," he said, surrounded by Cabinet members in the Rose Garden.

Bush, who once owned the Texas Rangers, said, the Mitchell Report means that "we can jump to this conclusion: that steroids have sullied the game."

Anonymous said...

Some more players today admitted to using performance enhancing drugs for "healing purposes."

Ron said...

Bonds is being chased as a scapegoat for the league, even though these drugs were legal (not banned) when he took them. He might be guilty of perjury, but many politicians are guilty of perjury. If you look at Senator Mitchell's history as a Democrat, has he always been honest to Americans? Is he even credible as the guy behind this report? Doubtful.

Anonymous said...

HGH is not a steroid. If Bonds was asked did you take anabolic steroids and he took HGH, he did not lie by saying no.

If Bonds did use steroids, why would he just not have said, I take the fifth amendment and said nothing. I think that is what big boy McGuire did...

Folks, get off Barry's butt!

Anonymous said...

I agree, Barry Bonds is so misunderstood....

Legal Pub said...

Update 5-13-08 Barry Bonds was indicted for two counts of Perjury. He will have to face trial unless he enters a plea!

Legal Pub said...

Update 4-8-11: We've held up on an update because you know we hate to say we told you so.... Barry Bonds case is in the hands of the jury after the Defense chose to call no witnesses. Closing statements aren’t evidence and typically they are not all that persuasive in most cases. But they do give the audience an outline of what the lawyer's think was important during the evidence phase of trial. The prosecutor’s theme was “all he had to do was tell the truth.” But did the prosecution prove by the evidence the basis for the alleged lie? With perhaps the exception of the single charge relating to injections, did anyone testify that “Barry lied?" If Barry Bonds was a rampant steroids user who knew that what he was doing was wrong, then why didn't someone testify as such in the courtroom? The defense argued that the prosecution was a vendetta against Bonds. Prosecutio witnesses were labelled as ex-friends or scorned lovers. Bonds was definitely intended to be "made and example." Even if Bonds was not completely truthful, a guilty verdict may seem excessive given the relative insignificance of performance enhancing drugs. What real significance is there that a baseball player took performance enhancing drugs when thousands of weekend weight lifters regularly take supplements without any real threat of prosecution? BALCO was already punished. Bonds' testimony did not negatively effect the prosecution of the "dealers." Kathy Hoskins testified she saw Bonds injected. But that alone does not prove that Bonds knew the injection contained an illegal steroid. In the end, was this trial much to do about nothing? Is it really so important to destroy every American sports hero? The jury will tell the world real soon.