Return to Baseball Leftovers

Barry Bonds mistress has "proof" he used steroids

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby lesgrant » Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:04 pm

red wrote:Lupica raised a good point today on the Imus show; not that I'm recommending listening to Imus; but he said, basically: why isn't anyone suing Canseco, or this girl, or whomever...
and I think that's valid.
And it bring in the question of these tapes. If you can prove what you say, you have the right to say it; if you can't, and you mkae it up- then you stand to be sued for a lot of money...
why isn't anyone suing?
McGwire says "never did it. Dont' know what he's talking abuot" but no suit. If the guy is trying to take down your career, wouldn't you fight tooth and nail? Nope. No suit. Just your word v. mine: almost like "I don't want to go to court, present eveidence, and hear your tapes, or see you pictures, or whatever else you have on me."

The fact that Bonds is doing nothing about this girl speaks something in itself.


That’s the thing about all of this.

No one has actually tried to challenge Conseco, the SF Chronicle, or Bonds’ mistress. People on this board are so sure all are lying but can offer no contradicting evidence that they’ve read or seen.

The only thing in defense of Bonds has been an assassination on the character of those who have brought evidence. There has been nothing to challenge the evidence directly.

By evidence I mean:

grand jury testimony
eyewitness accounts
postal records showing packages shipped from BALCO to Bonds
bank statements showing payments from Bonds to BALCO
Bond’s trainers’ assertions

The above items are explainable when taken one by one. But when linked to each other and to the other circumstantial evidence like the statistical power spikes, the change in Bonds’ physique, the age at which this was all accomplished. It’s a pretty damning picture.

Remember, no one saw Scott Peterson kill his wife. There was no murder weapon with his prints on it. No one can put him at the scene of the crime. But he’s still going to the gas chamber for it. So don’t talk about circumstantial evidence.

Circumstantial evidence, when combined with other circumstantial evidence equals proof in any court in this country, especially the court of public opinion.
Image
lesgrant
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 703
(Past Year: -2)
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby lesgrant » Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:14 pm

eftda wrote:
lesgrant wrote: Neither of the Bonds quotes are things a guy would say to a casual female friend.


My friend talks to his female friends that way all the time. Its jsut how he is. I also remember saying those things (in different ways) to my female friends.


and please stop calling me efta, its eftda. :-°


Sorry about the name. I guess I have no credibility whatsoever.

And if your friend talks to casual female friends like that, he’s a control freak to the extreme. I know of no one who would be like ‘I want to know where you’re at’ to a casual friend.

Furthermore, I didn’t say you’ve never said something like that. I said that neither you nor I have overtly mentioned the status of our relationship on an answering machine to our girlfriends.

You’ve probably never called your girlfriend up and said:

Hi this is eftda (she would know who you are), we’ve been sleeping together for the past 3 years. The reason why I’m calling is. . .

To expect Bonds to make that type of statement is ridiculous.
Image
lesgrant
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 703
(Past Year: -2)
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby lesgrant » Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:26 pm

eftda wrote:of course its ridiculous to expect that but if he said something like
"Haven't seen you in awhile, I miss you. Lets get dinner sometime." Would that be ridiculous?

Sorry about the name. I guess I have no credibility whatsoever.


I never said that. In fact, I respect your views.

And if your friend talks to casual female friends like that, he’s a control freak to the extreme


Well, he isn't. Hes laid back, and very lazy.


It's quite possible that he has said "Haven't seen you in awhile, I miss you. Lets get dinner sometime." She just didn't record that one.

So, I guess, from your comments, you don’t think this woman had a relationship with him?

Also, what do you make of the point that was made earlier that there has been no lawsuit from anyone over these allegations?

Why hasn’t anyone sued the SF Chronicle? Conseco? Regan Books? Bonds’ mistress?
Image
lesgrant
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 703
(Past Year: -2)
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby DK » Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:38 pm

lesgrant wrote:Also, what do you make of the point that was made earlier that there has been no lawsuit from anyone over these allegations?

Why hasn’t anyone sued the SF Chronicle? Conseco? Regan Books? Bonds’ mistress?


Why is Bonds going to be suiting up Opening Day for the Giants? Hasn't he been "proven", after all, to be a user?

I will repeat my previous statement.

DK wrote:
lesgrant wrote:“Barry Bonds has not used steroids.”

If you seriously believe that, then I have to take anything you say on any topic with a grain of salt.


lesgrant, look me in the avatar and say:

"Barry Bonds has been proven to use steroids."

If you seriously believe that, then I have to take anything you say on any topic with a grain of salt.
DK
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle Eye
Posts: 9077
(Past Year: -456)
Joined: 22 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: on deck

Postby red » Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:41 pm

eftda wrote:lesgrant, this isn't a "Did Bonds take Player Enchancement Drugs" thread.. its about the interview.

Did she have a relationship with Bonds?: I'll wait to see what he has to say. I learned that there are two sides to every story. Making up your mind after hearing one solves nothing. but it proves ignorance.

Is she telling the truth?: I'll read the book or wait for (more) evidence to come out.

Is the phone call real?: Could be, but then again how do we know its not out of context? (if there is more)

Is she telling the turth?: I don't know, I'm not a mind reader. I'll wait for more evidence to come out before I make up my mind. She could be, and if thats the case then I'd be stupid not to beleve it. But if word comes out that she lied then I'm going to be happy that I didn't jump the gun.


WHY I HAVE DOUBTS ABOUT HER STORY: because of who she took it too.


This is where all Bonds threads end up, inevitably. This one just took a while longer because WR took us through a Rosa Parks detour. And yes, you're right. You don't know- I don't know- you're waiting for more evidence. And I respect that.
And I have to give you credit, in particular, becuase despite the fact that you disagree with me and others on this thread; you aren't saying (as some do) that we are racist, or unamerican (innocent until proven guilty is a line we get a lot) blah blah. I respect that you have the right to wait for more evidence; you respect that I firmly believe that Bonds has intentionally done steroids (and no, not because I'm white, good lord, get over that people).

This is basically my point: There is a mountain of evidence (circumstancial, yes) some listed here-- some as plain as day and not listed here: like-- Barry Bonds is huge! that makes me believe he's done steroids. I don't know if he told this girl or not- but if they had a relationship for 7 years or longer yeah, I imagine it came up at a certain point. I wouldnt' doubt it. So I can't discredit her outright. Doesn't mean she's not a gold-digger. She's very likely a spurned woman who's upset at Bonds-- but over 7 or 8 years or however long--- I wouldn't doubt that she heard something.

If you want to wait for more evidence, I respect that. I have no more patience with Bonds. Why? Not because I hate him-- but because I WANT to love him. I want to believe that I will be alive and there to watch it when a man breaks Aaron's record. I want to believe that I'm watchig the greatest baseball player in history. I want to tell my kids what it was like to watch it and see it and how the place went crazy and how baseball made me feel like I was twelve again.

I'm not ruining it for Barry.
Barry's ruining it for me.
red
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 503
Joined: 1 Feb 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby lesgrant » Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:44 pm

DK wrote:
lesgrant wrote:Also, what do you make of the point that was made earlier that there has been no lawsuit from anyone over these allegations?

Why hasn’t anyone sued the SF Chronicle? Conseco? Regan Books? Bonds’ mistress?


Why is Bonds going to be suiting up Opening Day for the Giants? Hasn't he been "proven", after all, to be a user?

I will repeat my previous statement.

DK wrote:
lesgrant wrote:“Barry Bonds has not used steroids.”

If you seriously believe that, then I have to take anything you say on any topic with a grain of salt.


lesgrant, look me in the avatar and say:

"Barry Bonds has been proven to use steroids."

If you seriously believe that, then I have to take anything you say on any topic with a grain of salt.


The reason why Bonds is suiting up for opening day is because baseball is not going to sanction him. Just like they are not going to sanction Giambi of Sheffield. In Shef's case, he openly admitted to using 'roids last season. What's your point?
Image
lesgrant
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 703
(Past Year: -2)
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby DK » Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:48 pm

lesgrant wrote:
DK wrote:
lesgrant wrote:Also, what do you make of the point that was made earlier that there has been no lawsuit from anyone over these allegations?

Why hasn’t anyone sued the SF Chronicle? Conseco? Regan Books? Bonds’ mistress?


Why is Bonds going to be suiting up Opening Day for the Giants? Hasn't he been "proven", after all, to be a user?

I will repeat my previous statement.

DK wrote:
lesgrant wrote:“Barry Bonds has not used steroids.”

If you seriously believe that, then I have to take anything you say on any topic with a grain of salt.


lesgrant, look me in the avatar and say:

"Barry Bonds has been proven to use steroids."

If you seriously believe that, then I have to take anything you say on any topic with a grain of salt.


The reason why Bonds is suiting up for opening day is because baseball is not going to sanction him. Just like they are not going to sanction Giambi of Sheffield. In Shef's case, he openly admitted to using 'roids last season. What's your point?


Well, eftda hit another point in the fact that if he sued anyone, he'd
A: Just get murdered by the press some more
B: Prove that he actually cares what people think of him

When the latter is nothing but true. Again, I will ask you one more time, since you cleverly evaded it the first time:

lesgrant, look me in the avatar and say:

"Barry Bonds has been proven to use steroids."

If you seriously believe that, then I have to take anything you say on any topic with a grain of salt.
DK
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle Eye
Posts: 9077
(Past Year: -456)
Joined: 22 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: on deck

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests