Feds Triple Charges for Bonds, But Legal Exposure Stays the Same
This is a discussion on Feds Triple Charges for Bonds, But Legal Exposure Stays the Same within the Law News forum, part of the FORUM INFORMATION category; The Feds may have nearly tripled the number of charges against Barry Bonds yesterday, but his legal exposure remains the ...
POST NEW QUESTION |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
News
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 6,079
|
![]() The Feds may have nearly tripled the number of charges against Barry Bonds yesterday, but his legal exposure remains the same. In a re-written indictment unsealed in federal court in San Francisco, Bonds (pictured, in earlier days), who’s accused of lying under oath about his use of steroids, is charged with 14 counts of perjury, up from the original five counts. “It’s exactly the same,” Golden Gate U. law prof Peter Keane told the AP. “It’s two ways of saying it’s lying and there’s really no substantial difference between what he was charged with then and what he is charged with now.” Another legal eagle told the San Fran Chron that the new indictment wouldn’t necessarily increase Bonds’ likely maximum sentence of 30 months in prison if he is convicted of all the charges at his upcoming trial. Bonds’ legal team objected to the initial indictment, handed up in November, because by law, the government can accuse a defendant of only one crime per count of an indictment. Bonds lawyer Dennis Riordan contended that the indictment accused Bonds of telling as many as five lies in a single perjury count. Judge Susan Illston agreed, and ordered the government to rewrite the document. The new indictment broke each of the old perjury charges into multiple new ones. “All the government wanted to do here was cure the indictment to make sure the case could move forward,” Daniel C. Richman, a former prosecutor and Columbia law prof told the NYT. “Ironically, the government’s response was to give the jury more choices on what they can convict him on.” Last edited by top_admin; May 14th, 2008 at 10:06 AM. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmark & Share |
«
Whats Going on With Marc Dann? Heres What We Know
|
California's top court overturns gay marriage ban
»
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Bonds Mistress Says Bonds Abused Her, Blamed Injury on Steroids | WSJ Law Blog | Law News | 0 | Mar 28th, 2011 04:00 PM |
| With Trial Looming, Feds Streamline Charges Against Bonds | WSJ Law Blog | Law News | 0 | Feb 11th, 2011 03:40 PM |
| savings bonds: who is entitled to possess the bonds? | Unregistered | Miscellaneous Topics | 2 | Sep 21st, 2010 05:17 PM |
| Chicago pedestrian hit by DUI driver over triple the legal limit | forum_admin | Law News | 0 | Nov 29th, 2009 12:12 AM |
| Afternoon Roundup: Feds Seek to Drop AIPAC Charges, More | WSJ Law Blog | Law News | 0 | May 1st, 2009 09:00 PM |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:15 PM.









Linear Mode


