The Steroids Trial Of The Century

Wow how long will the y drag this crap out.and at what expense to the tax payers who in a poll for CNN didnt even care and were discusted at the price tag of these hearings.If the government is so worried about setting a good example for the children stop doing so much corruption and the covering it up.People need to stop comparing steroids to heroin the not even close. Alot of this message comes from Mr Hoten,I am sorry his son hung himself but there was no evidence of steroids playing a role none. Congress let him testify because they used him to push the issue. His son was taking several anti depressants which are proven to cause teens to commit suicide. Lets go after them , yeah right , the pharmcutical compomponies have to much power and money. PEDs have been out since 1939 and alot of atheletes have used especially baseball players in the 50s, 60s 70s and 80s. And when they werent using PEDS they were using speed an amphetimines. So do we start questioning some of the old time greats and threatening thier families for evidence? I think they should launce a investigation into any offical who is involved in these trials and try and get any dirt on them by any means to make sure they are worthy enough to even be pointing fingers at anyone.

You may be a sportswriter i am simply a baseball fan. My adamant abjection is not your opinion, I object to Lawmakers injecting themselves into MLB under any circumstances, therfore I attach no credibility to the politically motivated self-serving arguments that lawmakers put forth. They have more a documented history of corruption than any and all sportsfigures. That is why I resent them pursuing Barry Bonds for all this time. I resent their tactics of intimidating family members in an attempt to frighten them into giving them evidence they have noi intention of giving. I thhink this a complete waste of raxes. I hope Barry Bonds is acquitted simply because the same politicians that are asking these questions are certaqinly politicians that have their own dirty secrets they will never talk about. You may be interested in Barry Bonds being perceived as guilty. I am interested in government and their prosecutors staying out of America's pastime. Atty Gen GGonzales resigned from his position under a dark cloud of misuse of the Justice system. If you believe that is not taking place in the Barry Bonds case I disagree. Sheesh Government prosecuters attempting to intimidate Americans to provide evidence so they can convict the Home Run king. I am not for that and if Blnds did use steroids and did no admit it I do not think it is best for this nation to use the ful;l force of the law to convict an American of a crime that has not hurt or harmed one other person. Only the notion that Government Prosecuters have decided they are too high and mighty for anybody dare not tell thenm what they want to know. In fact they denabd an American tell on himself if he did do something wrong. That in my opinion is worse than anything Bonds is accused of. I hope he beats them and they start using tax dollars to solve more imortant and demanding crimes. Not crimes they simply pursue to bring down a Sports Star.

First, why does no one ever ask the threshold question: Do any PEDs ("performance-enhancing drugs") actually make any meaningful difference to performance in baseball? It seems to be taken as axiomatic that they do--but the overwhelming consensus of the scientific and analytic literature on the subject says emphatically that "No, they do not." In the rush to see who can be the holiest pontificator, writers, politicians, and many of the public ignore the available facts (see, for example, the web site "Steroids, Other 'Drugs', and Baseball", http://steroids-and-baseball.com).

Second, the remark "Concern yourself with courtroom principles like 'beyond a reasonable doubt' and most anything can seem a muddle" is horrifying and detestable. Yeah, let's throw away western jurispridence, ethics, and common sense: after all, I'm a writer, I know best. "Beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt" does not mean absolutely, positively, 100% sure: it means just what it says--a REASONABLE doubt. Can a reasonable person still have doubts about the truth of a matter even after all the evidence is in? That's the standard. Certainly private individuals can each opinions on a lesser evidentiary standard--but they're opinions, that's all.

Third, if--as all the scientific evidence shows--it is highly unlikely that PEDs have had any substantial effect on either individual results or the overall records of baseball, what treatment is appropriate for those who used them anyway? Western justice has traditionally been far more lenient with attempted crimes than actual crimes, and using PEDs is 9for ball players, not all athletes, one must emphasize) useless. So even though they "cheated", if their cheating necessarily came to nought, how do we treat them? Many thoughtful observers suggest that PED use is closely analogous to having a drink during Prohibition.

This whole topic urgently needs to be moved out of the realm of screaming witch hunting and into the realm of fact-based, goal-oriented calm deliberation, but articles like this one do just the opposite.