Blast From the Past: Barry Bonds Sentence

Barry Bonds was sentenced today for his conviction of misleading a Grand Jury. More on that later. The sentence was for a month of home confinement, a fine of $4,100, 250 hours of community service and 2 years probation. The sentence was immediately stayed by the Judge to allow Bonds to appeal his conviction to the Federal 9'th Circuit Court of Appeals, a process that could take an estimated 18 months. The federal prosecutor, who was seeking a prison sentence, was not happy. He argued that Bonds led a double life, used steroids, kept mistresses while he was married 3 times, none of which had one shred of anything to do with what Bonds was convicted of. More on THAT later too!

I have to admit to conflicting feelings about the whole sorry steroid/performance enhancing drug(PED) mess. On the one hand, I abhor the whole notion that kids feel they have to take drugs like this to have a chance to succeed in their chosen sport. I want a level playing field for kids who don't put harmful substances into their bodies. The whole PED episode in Major League Baseball has diminished my own appreciation for the achievements of many players during that era, including those of Barry Bonds. On the other hand, PED's, in one form or another, are ubiquitous in the workplace for all of us, and have always been a part of the game of baseball.

Caffeine is a PED. It is a stimulant that makes you feel energetic when you would otherwise feel tired. It makes you alert when you would otherwise feel sleepy. It's everywhere! It is mildly addictive. Society has decided that it's benefits far outweigh any harm that it does or any unfair advantage it may give us. As far as I know, there is no disease process that has been linked to caffeine except maybe some irregular heart rhythms in some people, and there is no evidence that is shortens anyone's life.

Nicotine is a PED. There is a reason why it is used by many ballplayers during games other than peer pressure. Nicotine improves concentration and possibly other cognitive functions. Similar drugs have been studied as possible treatments for Alzheimer's Disease. Unfortunately, nicotine is highly addictive and it's long term use causes a host of terrible diseases that cost all of us enormous amounts of money in increased healthcare costs. There is no question that it shortens lives. Once upon a time, society accepted that the benefits of nicotine outweighed its negatives. While that is no longer the case, it is still a legal drug that can be purchased without a prescription, even though it continues to be a significant public health problem.

Alcohol could be considered a PED when used in small-moderate quantities in certain social situations. When used in high quantities or for prolonged periods of time, it can be extremely impairing and downright dangerous. It has severe addictive potential and can cause a wide variety of diseases, some fatal. It is legal for adults to buy and sell alcohol and it is widely used.

Amphetamines are PED's. They have a similar effect as caffeine only much more dramatic. They are highly addictive and can lead to behaviors that endanger not only the user but others around the user. Society has collectively decided that the risks of amphetamines outweigh the benefits. Most of them are either illegal or else require a special prescription from a physician. Yet, their use remains widespread. They were used extensively by ballplayers in the 60's and 70's, probably the 80's too.

Anabolic steroids are also PED's. They aid in building muscle mass and possibly in wound healing. Long term use can cause a variety of disease processes and behavior disorders. There is overwhelming circumstantial evidence that their use by baseball players and participants in other sports was widespread in the 1990's and early 2000's. Although many of these substances , like amphetamines, were illegal to prescribe or distribute, they were not banned by Major League Baseball until the last Collective Bargaining Agreement(CBA) with the Player's Association. There is abundant evidence that they were used with the knowledge and support of the people who govern the game. Society has rightfully collectively determined that these substances not only give the users an unfair advantage, but also carry a greater risk than benefit to the users. Although Major League Baseball has banned these substances and is now testing players for them, the Ryan Braun incident tells us that they are likely still being used by some baseball players.

I'm not sure what the point of all that is. I'll just make a few summary observations:

1. Most of us use PED's of one form or another in our own work and lives.

2. Drugs that are clearly harmful are still perfectly legal and easily obtainable.

3. Whether drugs/PED's are considered "good" or "bad" or acceptable vs unacceptable is largely determined by the consensus of public opinion.

I believe it is an open question whether it is right for players who used PED's prior to their formal banning in the CBA to be punished, either by MLB or by society through the judicial system. Of course, now that there is a formal ban and players are being tested, the rules need to be either enforced or eliminated.

In my opinion, the "War on Drugs" has done way more harm to our country than the drugs themselves. Not only has it led to incredible levels of violence and deaths, not only has it diverted resources that would be better used for other things, it has led to an erosion of our civil liberties that we should not tolerate.

A common practice by prosecutors is to use Grand Juries as a "perjury trap". Unlike other settings, you are not allowed to invoke the 5'th amendment in Grand Jury testimony if you are not the target of the Grand Jury, but neither do you get immunity from prosecution for things that are revealed by your statements. Most of us first became aware of this practice during Kenneth Starr's pursuit of Bill Clinton in the Whitewater investigation that somehow morphed into the Monica Lewinsky investigation and, well, you know the rest.

Federal prosecutors set the same trap for Barry Bonds. He had already told investigators he did not knowingly use PED's. Now he was going to be asked these questions again under oath in front of a Grand Jury. If he admitted to using PED's, then they would charge him with perjury in the investigation. If he denied using them, the prosecutors were confident they had enough evidence to convict him of perjury to the Grand Jury. Mind you, there was never any attempt to convict him of, you know, actually using PED's.

Bonds answered the key questions with "rambling, non-sequitors" that the Jury in his trial determined were "misleading" to the Grand Jury. He was convicted, not of lying to the investigators, but of misleading the Grand Jury, Obstruction of Justice. Fair enough. My only question is why is it a crime for Barry Bonds to "mislead" a Grand Jury, but it's apparently perfectly alright for the prosecutor to attempt to mislead the jury and judge by invoking all kinds of irrelevant information such as Bonds' still alleged longstanding PED use, and his habitual use of mistresses while he was married 3 times? Non sequitors! Now, THAT ought to be Obstruction of Justice!

In my opinion the biggest lesson we all should learn from this sad, sordid tale is that we can all apparently be convicted of a crime if we fail to enthusiastically support an investigation. That, and the general misuse of prosecutorial power, ought to scare the heck out of all of us.