Turk Wendell thinks Sosa was on the juice

[cubbieinexile]

 

We have Conte in a 60-minutes interview saying it was a calender to lay out which drugs to take at which times. I mean, what do we want? Someone to walk up to us with the actual documents so we can have a personal look? Even then, the docs could have been altered before we saw them...

 

It's asking for absolute proof. And that kind of proof seldom comes around. What we're left with is a mountain of circumstancial evidence, the testimony of several players in the whole deal, TV interviews, books that put it together, etc. It's enough. Sure, there's an outside chance it's all wrong----maybe everyone's lying because they don't like Barry. It's not very likely, but yeah it's possible. But it's enough evidence for a reasonable person to conclude he did it--which you seem to be leaning toward. I'm definitely already there.

 

What's wrong with wanting to see them? I already showed you two examples of where the media told us what we were supposed to see in the documents only to have that be false. On top of that media has said that Bonds confessed even though he didn't. If I am a juror I'll make the decision not the reporter sitting in the back.

[goonys evil twin]

What's wrong with wanting to see them? I already showed you two examples of where the media told us what we were supposed to see in the documents only to have that be false. On top of that media has said that Bonds confessed even though he didn't. If I am a juror I'll make the decision not the reporter sitting in the back.

 

This isn't a court of law, so proof beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't matter. A reasonable look at the evidence is more than enough to judge.

[cubbieinexile]

When you talk about Conte and the 60 minutes interview are you talking about the 20/20 interview from several years ago?

If so I don't recall Conte giving up Bonds like that. From what I remember he gave up Marion Jones and some track athletes but he says he personally never gave Bonds anything, that he gave Anderson steroids for his own personal use. Not saying its true but Conte to the best of my knowledge has never given up Bonds. In fact he even issued a statement saying he never has given up Bonds to the government.

 

Perhaps I missed the 60 minutes interview, do you have a link?

[cubbieinexile]

This isn't a court of law, so proof beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't matter. A reasonable look at the evidence is more than enough to judge.

 

A reasonable look? So not seeing them at all and only hearing about them third hand and that being disputed itself is a reasonable look?

 

Does anybody here actually know what it says on Anderson's computer and what is on the calendar?

[UBlink]

What's wrong with wanting to see them? I already showed you two examples of where the media told us what we were supposed to see in the documents only to have that be false. On top of that media has said that Bonds confessed even though he didn't. If I am a juror I'll make the decision not the reporter sitting in the back.

 

This isn't a court of law, so proof beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't matter. A reasonable look at the evidence is more than enough to judge.

 

I think a reasonable look at the evidence would be sufficient if there were some assurance that we are getting reasonably unbiased evidence. But with unconfirmed excerpts from grand jury investigations as evidence I'm going to wait. And I still insist whoever leaked grand jury testimony, if in fact anyone really did, is guilty of a much more serious crime than anything Bonds is allegeed to have done.

[AI]

This isn't a court of law, so proof beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't matter. A reasonable look at the evidence is more than enough to judge.

 

A reasonable look? So not seeing them at all and only hearing about them third hand and that being disputed itself is a reasonable look?

 

Does anybody here actually know what it says on Anderson's computer and what is on the calendar?

 

Barry's lawyers have likely seen all these things. If any of this really wasn't true, Barry's lawyers would be knocking each other down to get to the courthouse to file a libel lawsuit.

 

When Bo Jackson was accused, he sued so fast heads spun. He got an apology and a retraction within a week.

 

You can talk all you want about evidence. If it was weak, or worse, fraudulent, there'd be a suit.

[cubbieinexile]

So who is Barry Bonds going to sue?

[Banedon]

So who is Barry Bonds going to sue?

 

Whoever is printing all these "lies". The authors of this book coming out for one. San Fransico Chronicle, which is often quoted by the rest of the media as a source for the anti-Bonds stories for another. I don't think Bonds problem is that he doesn't know who to sue. I think it's that he doesn't have a leg to stand on.

[cubbieinexile]

And what lies has the SF chronicle printed?

 

As for the book it isn't out yet so we have no idea what BOnds will or will not to it. Nor how they word what they have to say.