The Barry Bonds perjury and obstruction of justice trial went to the jury at the close of business yesterday and 24 hours later the jury has completed their first full day of deliberations. Jury instructions were provided yesterday and the jury picked up deliberations this morning at 8:30am. At one point in the morning the jury had the Steve Hoskins-Greg Anderson tape replayed (along with a viewable transcript). At the end of the day they asked to view a transcript of Kathy Hoskins testimony. The court said that wasn't allowed but they could have her testimony read back to her. Due to the timing of the request, the court and jury decided to do that first thing Monday morning.
As the jury works to determine Bonds' guilt or innocence, they have been provided a rundown of each of the counts against Bonds. The government has to prove a certain number of elements to get a guilty verdict for each count. Additionally, each count is determined separately from each other. The fourth count of perjury was dropped leaving three counts of perjury and one count of obstruction of justice.
COUNT ONE - FALSE DECLARATION
(18 U.S.C. § 1623(a))
The defendant is charged in Count One with making a material false declaration before a grand jury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1623(a). Count One alleges that the defendant made the following material false declaration (underlined below):
Question: I know the answer - - let me ask you this again. I know we kind of got into this. Let me be real clear about this. Did he [Anderson] ever give you anything that you knew to be a steroid? Did he ever give a steroid?
Answer: I don't think Greg would do anything like that to me and jeopardize our friendship. I just don't think he would do that.
Question: Well, when you say you don't think he would do that, to your knowledge, I mean, did you ever take any steroids that he gave you?
Answer: Not that I know of.
In order for the defendant to be found guilty of Count One, the government must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. The defendant testified under oath before a grand jury;
2. The testimony described above was false;
3. The testimony was material to the grand jury before which he testified; and
4. The defendant knew that the testimony described above was false and material to the grand jury before which he testified.
A statement was material if it had a natural tendency to influence, or was capable of influencing, the decision of the grand jury to which it is addressed.
COUNT TWO – FALSE DECLARATION
(18 U.S.C. § 1623(a))
The defendant is charged in Count Two with making a material false declaration before a grand jury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1623(a). Count Two alleges that the defendant made the following material false declaration (underlined below):
Question: Did Greg ever give you anything that required a syringe to inject yourself with?
Answer: I’ve only had one doctor touch me. And that’s my only personal doctor. Greg, like I said, we don’t get into each others’ personal lives. We’re friends, but I don’t – we don’t sit around and talk baseball, because he knows I don’t want – don’t come to my house talking baseball. If you want to come to my house and talk about fishing, some other stuff, we’ll be good friends. You come around talking about baseball, you go on. I don’t talk about his business. You know what I mean?
********************************
Question: So no one else other than perhaps the team doctor and your personal physician has ever injected anything in to you or taken anything out?
Answer: Well, there’s other doctors from surgeries. I can answer that question, if you’re getting technical like that. Sure, there are other people that have stuck needles in me and have drawn out - - I’ve had a bunch of surgeries, yes.
Question: So - -
Answer: So sorry.
Question: - - the team physician, when you’ve had surgery, and your own personal physician. But no other individuals like Mr. Anderson or any associates of his?
Answer: No, no.
In order for the defendant to be found guilty of Count Two, the government must prove each of
the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. The defendant testified under oath before a grand jury;
2. The testimony described above was false;
3. The testimony was material to the grand jury before which he testified; and
4. The defendant knew that the testimony described above was false and material to the grand jury before which he testified.
A statement was material if it had a natural tendency to influence, or was capable of influencing, the decision of the grand jury to which it is addressed.
COUNT THREE – FALSE DECLARATION
(18 U.S.C. § 1623(a))
The defendant is charged in Count Three with making a material false declaration before a grand jury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1623(a). Count Three alleges that the defendant made the following material false declaration (underlined below):
Question: And, again, just to be clear and then I’ll leave it, but he [Anderson] never gave you anything that you understood to be human growth hormone? Did he ever give you anything like that?
Answer: No.
In order for the defendant to be found guilty of Count Three, the government must prove each
of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. The defendant testified under oath before a grand jury;
2. The testimony described above was false;
3. The testimony was material to the grand jury before which he testified; and
4. The defendant knew that the testimony described above was false and material to the grand
jury before which he testified.
A statement was material if it had a natural tendency to influence, or was capable of influencing,the decision of the grand jury to which it is addressed.
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
(18 U.S.C. § 1503)
The defendant is charged in Count Five with obstruction of justice in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1503. In order for the defendant to be found guilty of Count 5, the government must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. The defendant corruptly, that is, for the purpose of obstructing justice,
2. obstructed, influenced, or impeded, or endeavored to obstruct, influence, or impede the grand jury proceeding in which defendant testified,
3. by knowingly giving material testimony that was intentionally evasive, false, or misleading.
A statement was material if it had a natural tendency to influence, or was capable of influencing, the decision of the grand jury.
The government alleges that the underlined portion of the following statements constitute material testimony that was intentionally evasive, false or misleading. In order for the defendant to be found guilty of Count 5, you must all agree that one or more of the following statements was material and intentionally evasive, false or misleading, with all of you unanimously agreeing as to which statement or statements so qualify:
1. The Statement Contained in Count One
2. The Statement Contained in Count Two
3. The Statement Contained in Count Three
4. Statement A:
Q: Let me move on to a different topic. And I think you’ve testified to this. But I want to make
sure it’s crystal clear. Every time you got the flax seed oil and the cream, did you get it in person
from Greg?
A: Yes.
Q: Is that fair?
A: Yes.
Q: And where would you typically get it? Where would you guys be when he would hand it to you generally?
A In front of my locker, sitting in my chair.
Q: Did he ever come to your home and give it to you?
A: Oh, no, no, no. It was always at the ballpark.
5. Statement B:
Q: …Do you remember how often he recommended to you about, approximately, that you take this cream, this lotion?
A: I can’t recall. I don’t – I wish I could. I just can’t . . . I just know it wasn’t often. I just think it was more when I was exhausted or tired than like a regular regimen. You know, it was like if I was really sore or something, really tired…that’s – that’s --- that’s all I can remember about that.
Q: … would you say it was more or less often or about the same as the amount of times you took the liquid, the flax seed oil, the thing you understood to be flax seed oil?
A: I don’t know. I never kept track of that stuff. I’m sorry. I didn’t sit there and monitor that stuff.
6. Statement C:
Q: Did Greg ever give you anything that required a syringe to inject yourself with?
A: I’ve only had one doctor touch me. And that’s my only personal doctor. Greg, like I said, we don’t get into each others’ personal lives. We’re friends, but I don’t – we don’t sit around and talk baseball, because he knows I don’t want – don’t come to my house talking baseball. If you want to come to my house and talk about fishing, some other stuff, we’ll be good friends, you come around talking about baseball, you go on. I don’t talk about his business. You know what I mean? …
Q: Right.
A: That’s what keeps our friendship. You know, I am sorry, but that – you know, that – I was a celebrity child, not just in baseball by my own instincts. I became a celebrity child with a famous father. I just don’t get into other people’s business because of my father’s situation, you see…
7. Statement D:
Q: Did Greg ever give you testosterone in injectable form for you to take?
A: No.
Q: Would you have taken it if he gave it to you?
A: He wouldn’t jeopardize our friendship that way.
Q: And why would that – you’re very clear that that would jeopardize your friendship. Why would that jeopardize your friendship?
A: Greg is a good guy. You know, this kid is a great kid. He has a child.
Q: Mm-hmm.
A: Greg is – Greg has nothing, man. You know what I mean? Guy lives in his car half the time, he lives with his girlfriend, rents a room so he can be with his kid, you know? His ex takes his kid away from him every single five minutes. He’s not that type of person. This is the same guy that goes over to our friend’s mom’s house and massages her leg because she has cancer and she swells up every night for months. Spends time next to my dad rubbing his feet every night. Our friendship is a little bit different.