Writers get 18 months in jail

I dont want to say good,because Im not sure Jail is the right place for guys like this(they didnt kill or rape anyone,they wrote a poor book)but I guess they got what was coming

There needs to be some alternative for "criminals" like this,or martha stewart,etc.They shouldnt be locked up with dangerous convicts,but they still should be punished.

They went to jail for refusing to reveal the person or persons who gave them the secret grand jury testimony. My first question is would the people who stole the documents get 18 months if they were convicted?

I have no place in my heart for these reporters or the press in general, but it has been an important principle in maintaining a free press that people have not had to reveal their sources.

How many of the thousands of leaks have been investigated that have come from this grand jury or any other one for that matter? How hard are the U.S. Attorney's investigating the people in their own office?

Finally, I am no fan of Bonds, but this has taken on the appearance of a witch hunt for some time now. I know that the U.S. Attorney's office has much better things to do with their time and my money than endlessly chase this idiot. I am sure that Al-Quida and our porous borders are a bigger threat to most American's safety than the expanding head of Barry Bonds.

Couldnt have said it better myself

This is turning into salem and the red scare all over again.Havent they learned anything from history?

I agree with deldad and futurecatcher27 to some degree. We are in a period of time where the government is trying to muzzle the media ba all means at its disposal. Regardless or your politics and regardless of teh story, 18 months is absolutely ludicruis. If Barry bonds is convicted of the allege crimes and he was sentenced to the maximum, he soul never get 18 months. What have we come to in this country?

TW344

they're going to jail for not telling their source. An age old battle fought to keep freedom of the press. Like or don't like this particular situation but it speaks to the bigger picture of a free press which I think is a pretty important thing. It is not and cannot be about these two individuals and this situation-the bigger picture of a free press is and always will be the issue in a free society.

In this particular case, folks, "Freedom of the Press" is a specious argument and you will see it "shot down" by the appellate court.

It's about the sanctity of the Grand Jury proceedings, which is supposed to be SECRET, so no one would be intimidated from appearing before that body.

We should all feel comfortable about appearing before a Grand Jury and not have to worry about our testimony appearing in a book someone writes for PROFIT!

These arent criminal for heavens sake!They didnt Rob,rape,or Shoot someone,they wrote a book.This book alone didnt "tear" apart barry bonds life,it was a crash already.

Why cant there be alternate punishment for "criminals" like this?A start would be donating profit from the book to a respected organization,or community service,not wasting a year in our prison system.

Why doesnt our government worry about issues that might actually effect the american people?Start by defending us and not letting 3000 of our people be brutally murdered on US soil,much less anywhere.We pay taxes(yes,including me as of last march)so they can fund services for america,not waste time catching guys like this

Sorry for the rant,I know this isnt a political message board,but lately,I am ashamed to say Im an american.

Grand Juries are a farce and are one of the few bad ideas we adopted from the British. It is not uncommon to hear the saying that you could indict a ham sandwich for the Kennedy assasination. Leaks from Grand Juries are as common as stealing signs from the catcher. Further most Grand Jury proceedings are recorded and transcribed for future reference. Any testimony received in the Grand Jury cannot be used in trial, the confrontation clause takes care of that. The fact that the witnesses and the government have something to hide bothers me.

18 months seems just to me - in addition to Beenthere's point - they deserve it on the grounds of sheer stupidity anyway - IMO.

Why in the world would anyone subject themselves to this - when the issue at hand is Barry Bonds.
LOL

No sympathy for these guys at all. As grown adults - they should have known the Golden Rule "Stay as far away from Barry as you possibly can". And if you dont - dont whine about what happens next.

Conte only got 4 months in jail and 4 months of house arrest for distributing this poison for years. 18 months for two reporters for the crime of being money grubbing low lifes is fine but then Conte should have died an old man behind bars. Again the target is Bonds and the prosecuter's would sell their soul to bag that elephant. "Its" you are correct about the stay away from Bonds advice, maybe you should forward that to the US attorney's office.

quote:

Grand Juries are a farce and are one of the few bad ideas we adopted from the British. It is not uncommon to hear the saying that you could indict a ham sandwich for the Kennedy assasination. Leaks from Grand Juries are as common as stealing signs from the catcher. Further most Grand Jury proceedings are recorded and transcribed for future reference. Any testimony received in the Grand Jury cannot be used in trial, the confrontation clause takes care of that. The fact that the witnesses and the government have something to hide bothers me.

What???????????????????? You've been listening to too many defense attorneys in Chicago.

You must be a Russ Limbogercheese fan!

Granted, I'm coming from the perspective of someone who has been in the journalism business for going on 30 years. But the doings of the two reporters to date are about the only things about this case that DOESN'T STINK.

Now, I want sports cleaned up as much as anybody. But let me see if I have this straight:

While Barry Bonds might be the one the prosecutors want, the world of track and field and football centainly have been involved in this case. We have seen evidence that WADA and the IOC wanted, and apparently received, information regarding the goings on. So, ...

If an athlete went before this supposedly secret grand jury and, without the right to avoid self-incrimination, admitted steroid use, it would not leave the courtroom walls, except for those very people who, though not involved in the case, would seek to proscute them.

So, why aren't the heads of WADA and the IOC being dragged into court?

This is the textbook case of shoot the messenger.

The reporters did and have been doing their jobs. The book was a by-product of their reporting for the newpaper. Their jobs were to find out what they could about the goings on. They came upon someone willing to give them information.

As a reporter, I have to attribute my information, and I should try to source my information as transparently as possible. Sometimes, though, I have to use unnamed sources.

When I do, that means they anonymous. Period. I determine, before I get the information (which may or may not be accurate), whether I'm going to extend this protection. And, I can tell you, this is not done often and not done without layers of consulation.

In this case, because you are dealing with a source who is breaking the law, you can be sure their was lots of consultation. The determination was the information was valuable enough that the individual(s) receive this vow.

Once the decision has been made to protect the identity, it is absolute. Not unlike (and please don't take this the wrong way) the confessional.

The reporters should be honored for keeping their promise. They might be the only ones in the whole shooting match NOT hiding an agenda.

Beenthere:

The Grand Jury system we adopted from England [in some States by Constitutional decree] along with the jury system [in almost all States and the US by Constitutional decree] is supposed to be society's protection against improper prosecution stratigies, whether it be charging the innocent or allowing the guilty to go without a trial. It is not supposed to be a tool of a hack prosecutor and, if you do not know there are a lot of hack prosecutors that misuse grand juries, then you have missed a lot.

When the grand jury works as it should it investigates BEYOND what the prosecutor wants and goes out on its own. It has the power and autority to do so, though all prosecutors and most judges don't want that and instruct grand juries accordingly. There are famous historical cases of such grand juries that uncovered serious crime and corruption.

However, in our "modern" era, grand juries are often misused. They are told by the prosecutor and his agents that they "cannot go beyond the evidence that we present to you" which is NOT TRUE. The grand jury sitting on the Bonds case could have called his ex girlfriend and other persons named and not named in the reporter's book who gave the reporter's the "non-leaked evidence" for their stories and which later were used in their book. With such evidence, any slightly unethical prosecutor worth his salt could have presented only that evidence before the grand jury and obtained probable cause sufficient to indict Barry Bonds. Or he could have presented only exonerating evidence or no evidence and not have been able to obtain an indictment. Or he might have chosen to not pesent anything to the grand ury about Bonds. Which did he choose? Was the incriminating evidence even presented to the grand jury? If not, why not? What role, if any, does the ownership of the Giants play in this whole thing? Why would someone close to the situation leak if they felt there was nothing "funny" going on? Without reporters like these, willing to do what they have done where is the check on the agenda of an unethical and/or corrupt prosecutor?

Remember also, it is not a crime to report "leaked" grand jury testimony. That crime is committed by the leaker. The reporters are charge with not telling the court who the leaker was. That is contempt of court and can either be declared "civil" contempt [involving a daily fine, etc] or "criminal" contempt which is jail time for a specified period[TOTALLY IN THE DISCRETION OF THE PRESIDING JUDGE] until appealed and possibly overturned or modified, of course. Do you suppose the leaker, the real "criminal" that the so called Judge and Prosecutor are so zealously going after, once he/she is revealed will receive 6 months in jail, let alone 18 months? If you do, are you and I living on the same planet?

The mass media today is basically lazy and does not pursue a story for the truth but somehow feels its job is to "present both sides" of every issue even if the issue only has one true side and everyone but the most uninformed among us [those whose exclusive source for the news of the world is the FOX Network, for example] knows there is only one truth involved. The UNDENIABLE FACT THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS OCCURRING is a prime example. Every reporter like these two, and there are not many like them, that try to go beyome the story presented by the authorities at news confeences as the absolute truth, should be venerated and applauded by a judicial system that purports to want to hear "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth". Without such reporters, those in the present system that do not believe in that mantra wil never be exposed. I don't really think even you want to live in that society, whether the convicted druggie Mr. Limbaugh [indicted, pled guilty and never served a day in jail] is still GOD or not.

TW344

quote:

The reporters should be honored for keeping their promise. They might be the only ones in the whole shooting match NOT hiding an agenda.

lolololol...How much money did they make with their "book"?

Their agenda: to make money at the expense of others.

Leave your politics at home, you bunch of eggheads.
This was about the idiots reporters getting time for the stupidness of not disclosing the low life who leaked the info.
Since when does revealing a source effect Freedom of the Press, they print whatever they want anyway. The difference today is their are networks and individuals to challenge the one sided stories.

IMO - These reporters are either:

1) Stupid
2) Arrogant
and/or
3) Naive.

Doesnt much matter which one - or combo - it is.

You dont play in Barry's world.

It's like entering a cage full of hungry monkeys - with your pants stuffed full of bananas.

You will leave that cage mauled. Guaranteed - every single time.

Rule number #1 - Stay away from Barry
Rule number #2 - Stay away from Barry
Rule number #3 - If you cant walk away from Barry - run away from Barry.

LOL

My, my, my. It never ceases to both surprise and enlighten me how many times my mother's old adage "ignorance is bliss" is proven true.

TW344

In the law, very few priviledges have been granted due to their importance in the social fabric. Husband-wife, doctor-patient, preist-penatant, and a reporter and his source. Would we have known anything about Watergate, the Pentagon Papers or other important stories that have kept us from an overreaching government. If Deep Throat would have been afraid of being revealed by force of a grand jury subpeona, would he have come forward?

I don't like these reporters, this story or this approach taken by the US Attorney but sometimes you have to protect the ugly duckling to preserve the swan.

Beenthere

The first obligation of these two men has been to report the news. They wouldn't have been assigned to the story if their newspaper thought few people were interested in it.

They wrote the book because they believed somebody was going to want to read it.

Should they apologize for doing their jobs well and making a buck doing so? Isn't that what we all try to do every day?

Look, there are a lot of things wrong with the media business today, not the least of which is the pressures applied by the business world. Many of us got into journalism as a profession, only to learn it's a business.

So maybe the steps from car salesman to journalist to lawyer (and back) aren't so big anymore. But the work produced by these reporters is this case is well above that discussion.

I hate that the dirty worlds of sports and drugs had to come together, and I hate what it has done to baseball. But every indication so far is that these guys are getting it right.

Get it right and get it first ... that's the profession I got into. Everything else is clutter.

Ok - here is a compromise.

The judge should overturn the 18 month sentence.

In its place - the reporters must spend 30 days with Barry Bonds - every single minute of every single day.

After Day 2 - I guarantee you that these two bastions of journalism will go back to the Judge - and ask to be sent to prison.

LOL

P.S. Stay away from Barry. He is poison. IMO.

So...Barry admittedly used steroids. The testimony leaked to the reporters shows that Barroid KNOWINGLY used multiple illegal steroids, and Human Growth Hormone. Bud Selig, the Commishioner of Baseball, vows to investigate, and penalize harshly.

Anyone hear anything from 'Ole Bud lately? He literally seems to have crawled under his desk or hidden in his closet. We may need to put his picture on a milk carton.

Barroid's personal trainer is refusing to testify. He's in jail for the second time. The reporters are in jail because they don't want to give up their source(s).

And Barroid is still lumbering around, chipping away at Hank's record.

No investigation...nothing. Bud puts his head in the sand, and hopes it all goes away.

Yep..makes perfect sense to me.

Here's how I see this whole thing playing out.

August 2007, Greg Anderson gets raped in prison for the 12th time and finally decides to testify. Bonds is arrested for perjury the day after he hits number 750. Johnnie Cochran's ghost appears on Larry King that night(via the psychic friends network) offering to represent Bonds. ESPN runs 24 hour coverage and actually does not mention the name Terrell Owens for 17 hours and 24 minutes. Bud Selig appears on the back of a Milk Carton. Donald Fehr sues George Mitchell for impersonating an investigator and milking the players association for millions. The two reporters are released and write a spiritual self help book and make millions.

A year later a California jury acquits Bonds after a brilliant defense by Nancy Grace that includes the line, "if the hat fits you must acquit." Bonds returns to the Giants hits 7 more homeruns limps off the field while displaying the one-finger salute in the 4th inning of a one-game playoff for the wildcard and states that it is all the presses fault.
Greg Anderson catches the 756 homerun ball and sells it for $14.95 on ebay. Bud Selig's picture appears on an episode of America's most wanted for still being missing. Victor Conte gives up the supplements business and opens an organic spinach farm. The US Attorney makes an unsuccessful run at the California Senate seat, writes a book that sells exactly 756 copies and is now copy editor for the legal section of the San Francisco chronicle.

And they all lived happy ever after.

P.S. The Anti doping agency runs short of funds and publish a book to raise money. "Where's Bud"