When I was a kid with three brothers, there were certain unwritten rules that you lived by. Never rat on your brother for smoking behind the house or trying chewing tobacco. Never, ever, discuss things that happen at home while your parents are out on a date,  never discuss what your brother is doing in the basement with his girlfriend, and definitely don't tell them about that condom he carries around in his wallet.  There were few things that were considered worse than narking on a friend or sibling.  We had our share of fights, and I can even remember my dad buying us boxing gloves so we could go outside and settle our disputes. Once my older brother and I argued about something trivial, and my dad said to us to come outside and settle it. I was 10 at the time and my brother was 12. I stood my ground, but eventually the two year age gap won out and I learned a valuable lesson, stay out of my older brother's business. That was the way things were back in the early 70's. Today, I would probably have taken my brother to court, divorced my parents, and won a huge settlement for that black eye I sported for a week.

Last night we learned that Greg Anderson, long time friend and personal trainer of Barry Bonds, is going back to jail because he is living by that same code I grew up with.  He has already served 3 months for his part in the Balco scandal, but apparently a federal grand jury wants him to testify again about Barry's alleged steroid use.   He refuses to do so in part because his "sealed" testimony has been leaked to the media. According to his attorney, Mark Geragos, (He is the same high profile attorney who represented Winona Ryder, Michael Jackson, Susan McDougal, Roger Clinton, and Scott Peterson.)

 "Jail is not going to have any coercive effect," Geragos said outside federal court. "He is not going to cooperate with a grand jury that is leaking like a sieve."

Secondly, he says that his original plea deal had language in it that stipulated that he did not have to cooperate with the federal investigation.  That may or may not be true, but what about the unwritten rules of childhood?  Should he have to tell on his friend even after he served time for his role in this scandal?  Why did they not ask him all the information they wanted at that time?  Supposedly, they want him to explain the "doping" schedule that they found.  The reason it needs explanation is because it isn't an obvious doping schedule. For example, an N on a date in a calendar may be for Norandrostene, or it could be for Niacin which is a normal dietary supplement used by weightlifters.  If the case against Bonds was so clear cut they would not need Anderson's testimony.  Unfortunately, too many are willing to accept as fact the leaked information which is skewed towards incrimination.  By the way the federal prosecutors are  unable to discern the meaning in the charts of Conte and Anderson you would think they were written by Dan Brown, author of the DaVinci Code.

 Lastly, where is the uproar by the media or those in the blogging nation over this injustice? When Judith Miller was jailed back in 2005 for contempt of court charges, the media rushed to her defense saying that she should not reveal her sources. (Miller is the NY Times reporter who basically accused Cheney's staff and Karl Rove of outing Valerie Plame)  She became a martyr for all of the news outlets because she would not reveal her source.  Why is being loyal to a news source looked upon as more noble than remaining true to a friend?  I am not saying that Anderson should not be jailed for contempt just as Miller was held in contempt because she would not testify.  That is the consequence for his actions, but at least someone should give the man some "kudos" for his loyalty. 

Greg Anderson will not remain in jail for long. According to sources in this news article, he will most likely get out within two weeks. That is when the grand jury's time is set to expire. I for one applaud Anderson. He has served his time in jail that both he and the federal prosecutors agreed upon. Leave the man alone and let him get back to his life, and while you are at it, how about spending some of my tax money on something worthwhile besides investigating whether or not Barry took steroids. Surely you can find bigger drug busts than Rush Limbaugh's Viagra. Maybe you should go after the names on Jason Grimsley's hit list of which I am betting Barry's name is not on it or it would have already been leaked. Maybe you should focus on Lance Armstrong's blood tests from 1999. Just possibly if you looked long enough at the evidence in the Bonds' case you might be able to prove the existence of steroid use the same way you could prove there was a second shooter on the grassy knoll. I think it's time to let it go, but that's just me. What say you bloggers?