Wednesday, March 16, 2005
With Congressional steroid hearings starting tomorrow, all the talk is that the "tough policy" that baseball has imposed on its players for drug testing really has no teeth. That’s a valid question, but it’s not what I want to know.
I’m still wondering why Barry Bonds wasn’t called to testify. It can’t be that Congress doesn’t want to hear from him, if anything, Congress would want him under their klieg lights to raise their own grandstanding ability.
I’m starting to wonder if Bonds can't testify because his testimony would spoil somehting else. I'm wondering if it has something to do with to do with the plea bargain that Greg Anderson is trying to negotiate. Anderson is the person from whom Bonds testified that he unknowingly obtained steroids. Dave Pinto speculates that Anderson is getting the deal in exchange for testimony against BALCO founder Victor Conte.
Could it be that Anderson is going to drop dime on someone else? Someone whom, if he testified on Capitol Hill would require immunity from prosecution?
If Bonds were the conduit for BALCO to reach athletes (in that Bonds arranged for meetings with BALCO representatives and other MLB players), Bonds could be facing criminal charges as an accomplice to distribute controlled substances. Testifying before Congress might blow this part of the case for prosecutors.
Bonds might be being left alone because he is facing criminal charges. I’d love to see a timeline of when Bonds got to the Giants, when BALCO was formed, and when BALCO started its growth phase.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]