I have recently released two articles on RealGMBaseball.com which detail the Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams story and contain RealGM Exclusive interviews.

There are two different articles, one of which is a news-report, reported on a straight-fact basis and is much shorter than the editorial piece.  I would encourage you to read the editorial piece, but if you'd rather read the report, it will take less of your time.

And as always, I also encourage your comments.

Links to the Articles:

Wiretap News Report:
Click Here

Editorial Piece:
Click Here

Grand juries haven’t exactly treated Barry Bonds very well in the past few months.  A leak from grand jury testimony, published in Game of Shadows, which was written by a duo of San Francisco Chronicle reporters, Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams formally released to the public what Barry Bonds had wished to withhold.  This also sparked what is now known as the Mitchell Commission, which is Major League Baseball’s own steroid investigation.

A grand jury investigated how the two Chronicle reporters obtained this information.  According to the San Francisco Chronicle, itself, Victor Conte, founder of BALCO, might have released Bonds’ grand jury testimony to a San Francisco Chronicle reporter, as detailed in a series of emails between Conte and Fainaru-Wada where the two constantly refer to a CD-ROM which is believed to have detailed the grand jury testimony.

And now, a grand jury is looking to indict Barry Bonds for perjury – which many believe, will be the last-chink-in-the-armor for Bonds and jail time will undoubtedly follow.  But, according to Wikipedia.org, Judge Sol Wachtler, former Chief Judge of New York State, “Once was quoted as saying, ‘A grand jury would indict a ham sandwich.’”  It’s no coincidence that many jurisdictions have elected to discontinue the use o####rand jury.

However, if Bonds’ legal team could prove that the grand jury testimony was leaked by a government official – the chance that Bonds could be acquitted would be dramatically increased.

On Sunday, December 12, 2004, about one week after the grand jury testimony was released by the Chronicle reporters, the San Francisco Chronicle published an article entitled, “Why we brought you the BALCO story.”

In discussing Williams and Fainaru-Wada’s reasons for disclosing the testimony, Chronicle staff writer, Phil Bronstein writes:

"Here is how we decided to publish secret testimony: We don't believe that it's our responsibility to enforce federal secrecy provisions surrounding grand jury proceedings.”

According to Jeralyn E. Merritt, criminal defense attorney in Denver and one of the principal lawyers in the Oklahoma City Bombing trial, as published on TalkLeft.com:

“Under federal law, only prosecutors, case agents, government and court employees and others on that side of the fence are prohibited from disclosing matters that occur before the grand jury. The defense is under no such prohibition. If a person associated with the defense had been the source, there would be no federal secrecy provision to enforce.”

This, she believes, rules out the possibility that the leaked testimony was obtained from an associate of the defense.  Furthermore, Conte, among others, has incessantly asserted that the government was the source of the grand jury leak.  If, indeed, this is true, the case against Bonds could take a major hit.

Bonds’ legal team could then turn the case against the government, and could claim that the government intentionally leaked the grand jury testimony in order to assist in the investigation over Bonds’ alleged perjury.  Why would the government do such a thing?  By releasing the testimony to the Chronicle writers to be published, it would allow another grand jury to use the published materials against Bonds.  As noted in the quote from Merritt, prosecutors, case agents, government and court employees are prohibited from speaking of grand jury testimony.  Conversely, now that the grand jury testimony is published material, it may be used to prosecute Bonds to the fullest extent.  If this were true, the government would be guilty of a major infraction of the law; and it would, at the least, constitute a full acquittal of Barry Bonds on the count of perjury.

But no matter what you chose to believe, if Bonds is indicted for perjury and tax evasion, we’re in for a lengthy trial that could end up in jail time for Bonds and/or others.  It’s simply not as clear-cut as many seem to believe.