/Fin

His perjury wasn’t evident initially or easy to prove.

I think most peoples contention is with the idea that if its not easy to prove or might cost a lot of money that it isn’t “worth” doing. The prosecutes probably thought he’d plea out. When he didn’t their only real option was to go forward.

The second sentence may well be true, but it doesn’t prove the first one.

The government decided he perjured himself, spent the better part of a decade investigating it and brought a substandard case to court because it was Barry Bonds.

I think the problem with this Duffy is that it’s as easy to prove that this is the case as it was to prove Bonds committed perjury.

Bonds wasn’t a criminal. His perjury wasn’t evident initially or easy to prove. The government decided he perjured himself, spent the better part of a decade investigating it and brought a substandard case to court because it was Barry Bonds.

You said perjury isn’t prosecuted.

No one said that.

Perjury is most often not investigated

Scooter Libby and Bernie Madoff agree, they usually let that shit slide.

Yes, leaking the ID of a covert CIA operative and fraud that cost investors $18 billion. Totally analogous situations.

Perjury is most often not investigated

Scooter Libby and Bernie Madoff agree, they usually let that shit slide.

Damn it! I really thought we had a chance this time…

I know you’re not the only one saying this.

We’ll agree to disagree. And shockingly no one’s mind changed yet again in an Internet debate. The streak continues.

No, it doesn’t. Perjury is most often not investigated unless its egregious because it’s too hard to prove in court and too cumbersome to investigate.

Ding ding ding. And in this case, the feds knew the guy they wanted to testify wouldn’t (and got denied every single time trying to bring up evidence related to him) but they pursued it anyway.

Sportsdork, I’ll concur that the investigation could have been handled better, but I think your viewpoint is based on hIndsight rather than severity of the crime.

I’m hardly the only person who has held this viewpoint over the incredibly long period of time it took to pursue and try this case. Hindsight it is not. The end result only affirms it.

We’re talking about FEDERAL crimes here. You guys are acting like perjury is an everyday occurrence. In this case, I still believe everybody is treated the same by the law.

My statement still is correct, the rich and famous and well-off still already get away with federal crimes all the fucking time. It’s called embezzlement and falsifying SEC records and perjury and things of that nature. You’re acting like this is the first and only perjury case or something. Yes these things do happen all the time, they just aren’t glorified like they were with Barry. This case was glorified ONLY because it was Barry.

Perjury has to be pursued. Otherwise it’s a meaningless crime that torpedoes our entire witness system. Standing before a judge or Congress and swearing to tell the truth (whole and nothing but) would be rendered as meaningless as Barry’s wedding vows.

No, it doesn’t. Perjury is most often not investigated unless its egregious because it’s too hard to prove in court and too cumbersome to investigate.

Where do you live? We’re already there and have been for a while.

That’s exactly what I was getting at.

How many times do the rich and famous and well-off ALREADY get away with shit??

We’re talking about FEDERAL crimes here. You guys are acting like perjury is an everyday occurrence. In this case, I still believe everybody is treated the same by the law.