For those who were wondering why Bonds wasn't suing the authors of the book:

 

Bonds to sue to over book's use of grand jury docs

ESPN.com news services

 

 

SAN FRANCISCO -- Barry Bonds plans to sue the authors and publisher of a book that alleges the San Francisco Giants' slugger used steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs.

 

Bonds' attorneys sent a letter Thursday to an agent for the authors of "Game of Shadows," alerting them of plans to sue the writers, publisher Gotham Books, the San Francisco Chronicle and Sports Illustrated, which published excerpts this month.

 

"Our client, Barry Bonds, will seek an ex parte application for a temporary restraining order against them, as well as Gotham Books/Penguin USA, Sports Illustrated Magazine and the San Francisco Chronicle," Alison Berry Wilkinson, an associate of Bonds' lead attorney, Michael Rains, wrote in the letter. "This injunctive action will be brought pursuant to California's Unfair Competition Law ... to obtain, in summary, disgorgement of any profits related to or derived from the publication and distribution of the book."

 

The letter, signed by Wilkinson was posted on the Chronicle's Web site. A hearing was tentatively scheduled for 11 a.m. Friday in San Francisco Superior Court.

 

"The reason we filed in the lawsuit in the simplest terms possible is to prevent the authors from promoting themselves and profiting from illegal conduct," Rains told The Associated Press on Thursday.

 

He said laws prohibit people from possessing grand jury materials unless they are unsealed and said authors Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams, both also reporters for the Chronicle, "have made a complete farce of the criminal justice system."

 

ESPN's Pedro Gomez reported that the planned lawsuit is not a libel suit.

 

The book, released Thursday, claims Bonds used steroids, human growth hormone, insulin and other banned substances for at least five seasons beginning in 1998.

 

"We certainly stand by our reporters and the reporting they did for us," Chronicle executive vice president and editor Phil Bronstein said. "Nothing that's happened will change that."

 

Bonds' legal team will ask a judge Friday to issue a temporary restraining order forfeiting all profits from publication and distribution, according to the letter. The lawyers plan to file the suit under California's unfair competition law.

 

The attorneys will ask a federal judge to initiate contempt proceedings "for the use of illegally obtained" grand jury transcripts the authors used in writing the book. Rains said profits should be forfeited because of that.

 

"What we're saying is, who are the real cheaters? They are the ones who are using these illegally obtained materials," Rains said.

 

Williams and Fainaru-Wada said the book will stand up to a court challenge.

 

"I don't know what the legal action they contemplate is," Williams said. "Gotham can speak to the legal issues, but the facts in our book are true and they will stand up to scrutiny."

 

"We fully stand behind our reporting of the book," Fainaru-Wada added.

 

Lisa Johnson, a spokeswoman for publisher Gotham Books, said the publisher supports both authors. "We at Gotham Books are shocked that Barry Bonds would take such a foolish step," she said. "Any respected First Amendment lawyer in America knows that his claim is nonsense."

 

Rains said Bonds will not comment directly on the lawsuit but strongly supports the case.

 

"Barry is doing fine," Rains said. "He's had a great spring as everyone knows. His bat speaks for himself and he's not going to speak on this action and this book."

 

The Giants refused to comment to Gomez. "The Giants have no response. This is Barry Bonds' personal issue."

 

A key source in the book is a former Bonds lover, Kimberly Bell, who bolsters the steroid case against Bonds and says she received money from the seven-time Most Valuable Player not reported to tax authorities.

 

"There is an ongoing investigation and I don't want to interrupt that in any way," she told Reuters. "Because of the investigation and the potential there at this time I am not making any commentary on the situation or the book."

 

Legal experts say the book could also prompt the U.S. attorney to investigate whether Bonds lied to a federal grand jury when he testified in the BALCO steroid case. Bell has already testified before a grand jury.

 

The book also claims sluggers Jason Giambi and Gary Sheffield, both now with the New York Yankees, also used performance-enhancing drugs.

 

Giambi was asked about Bonds' planned suit on Thursday at the Yankees' spring camp in Tampa, Fla.

 

"This is all news to me. I didn't know any more of this than what you guys know," Giambi said. "I've done what I had to do last year and I've gone forward. I handled it last year, gone forward and I'm worried about winning a World Series now. It was the best thing I needed to do."

 

The book claims Giambi turned to performance-enhancing drugs because he felt pressured to please his perfectionist father. "I think it's pretty pathetic that they tried to drag my father into it," Giambi said.

 

Sheffield would not comment.

 

"I don't even talk about it," Sheffield said.

 

Information from The Associated Press and Reuters was used in this report.

Pedro Gomez!

 

But it isn't a libel suit, interesting.

But it isn't a libel suit, interesting.

 

 

I think that has more to do with getting a hearing faster/getting book pulled faster than anything else.

I'm no legal genius and someone can prove me wrong easily if I am, but I am under the impression that Bonds would have to flat-out prove that stuff isn't true to win a libel suit and I don't see why he would.

 

And I'm not saying I think the stuff isn't true, I'm just saying either way, I don't know why he'd want to put himself on trial like that.

I'm no legal genius and someone can prove me wrong easily if I am, but I am under the impression that Bonds would have to flat-out prove that stuff isn't true to win a libel suit and I don't see why he would.

 

And I'm not saying I think the stuff isn't true, I'm just saying either way, I don't know why he'd want to put himself on trial like that.

 

 

I agree with you, he would have to flat out show that it isnt true.. But he could be doing this to show that it really isnt true... maybe he wants this whole trial thing to prove everyone wrong!

I'm no legal genius and someone can prove me wrong easily if I am, but I am under the impression that Bonds would have to flat-out prove that stuff isn't true to win a libel suit and I don't see why he would.

 

And I'm not saying I think the stuff isn't true, I'm just saying either way, I don't know why he'd want to put himself on trial like that.

 

 

Plus (and this is also just my understanding as a pre-law student) in a case such as this, Bonds would be suing the unnamed sources, in essence, since they brought the defamation to his character.

 

The authors would essentially have a 'he said, she said' defense and prove that what they were presented with was exactly what they wrote. Devil's in the details on this one, and really Bonds can't win, even if he is right in saying it's not true.

Yeah Bonds is in a no-win situation if he brings a libel suit, though that would be what would be preferred in the public's eyes.

 

I guess I better get my copy of the book quick.

Honestly, whether you think Bonds used the stuff or not, I would hope most would admit he has a legitimate point about sealed grand jury testimony being used in this book.

Honestly, whether you think Bonds used the stuff or not, I would hope most would admit he has a legitimate point about sealed grand jury testimony being used in this book.

 

 

That's why he's bringing the suit that he is and it's being heard tomorrow.

 

I'm no expert, but I'd expect him to win, quite easily, and that may mean that this book is pulled.

Every legal analyst out there say he has no chance to win this case.

Every legal analyst out there say he has no chance to win this case.

 

 

Whatever.. I'm with TSwift here. This book takes confidential information that was leaked during grand jury testimony. There is no way they legally obtained anything that transpired there.

Every legal analyst out there say he has no chance to win this case.

 

 

You serious?

 

It's illegal to publish grand jury testimony unless it's unsealed. In this case, what the writers are doing is illegal. Now maybe there's some odd loophole, but regardless of whether or not you like Bonds, or believe he did or didn't take steroids, what the writers did regarding his grand jury testimony is 100% against the law.

Every legal analyst out there say he has no chance to win this case.

 

 

You serious?

 

It's illegal to publish grand jury testimony unless it's unsealed. In this case, what the writers are doing is illegal. Now maybe there's some odd loophole, but regardless of whether or not you like Bonds, or believe he did or didn't take steroids, what the writers did regarding his grand jury testimony is 100% against the law.

who broke the law? the author that's reporting what was provided to him or the source that leaked the testimony? The content of the leaked testimony was already reported for the most part and why wasn't any legal suit filed then?

Every legal analyst out there say he has no chance to win this case.

 

 

You serious?

 

It's illegal to publish grand jury testimony unless it's unsealed. In this case, what the writers are doing is illegal. Now maybe there's some odd loophole, but regardless of whether or not you like Bonds, or believe he did or didn't take steroids, what the writers did regarding his grand jury testimony is 100% against the law.

who broke the law? the author that's reporting what was provided to him or the source that leaked the testimony? The content of the leaked testimony was already reported for the most part and why wasn't any legal suit filed then?

 

Well, in over simplified terms, because no one sought to profit off the illegal endeavour until now.

 

It's impossible to tell a person to shut up when they're spreading something, but when they're actually profiting off it, there's more of an avenue to attack.

Every legal analyst out there say he has no chance to win this case.

 

 

You serious?

 

It's illegal to publish grand jury testimony unless it's unsealed. In this case, what the writers are doing is illegal. Now maybe there's some odd loophole, but regardless of whether or not you like Bonds, or believe he did or didn't take steroids, what the writers did regarding his grand jury testimony is 100% against the law.

who broke the law? the author that's reporting what was provided to him or the source that leaked the testimony? The content of the leaked testimony was already reported for the most part and why wasn't any legal suit filed then?

 

Well, in over simplified terms, because no one sought to profit off the illegal endeavour until now.

 

It's impossible to tell a person to shut up when they're spreading something, but when they're actually profiting off it, there's more of an avenue to attack.

They didnt try to profit off of it when they published it in a newspaper?

Every legal analyst out there say he has no chance to win this case.

You serious?

 

It's illegal to publish grand jury testimony unless it's unsealed. In this case, what the writers are doing is illegal. Now maybe there's some odd loophole, but regardless of whether or not you like Bonds, or believe he did or didn't take steroids, what the writers did regarding his grand jury testimony is 100% against the law.The testimony is common knowledge in the public arena now, though. If he were going after the reporters then he might have a case, but since so much time has passed since the testimony was leaked it's a reasonable assumption those reading the books would have already come across it. You can't hold the authors responsible in that case.

The fact remains that that A$$clown Bonds isn't suing for libel or slander nor is he denying the material presented isn't true. I truly pray he faces charges on perjury and to tax evasion, again charges he isn't denying either. At this point I only have slightly more respect for Giambi due to his apology for something or nothing while not being specific about what he was apologizing for. When I think of Hank Aaron's record being held by Bonds I just want to puke.

Judge denies Bonds' initial lawsuit bid

 

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- A judge denied Barry Bonds' bid to block the authors and publishers from making money on a book claiming the Giants slugger used steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs, and said Bonds' suit against them has little chance of success.

Bonds' attorneys argued that the authors, publisher Gotham Books, the San Francisco Chronicle and Sports Illustrated, which published excerpts of the book, should be held liable for publishing "illegally obtained grand jury transcripts."

 

The book, "Game of Shadows," by Chronicle reporters Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams, is based partly on grand jury testimony from a federal investigation into the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative, where Bonds and several other major league players allegedly obtained performance-enhancing drugs.

 

But Judge James Warren refused to issue a temporary restraining order against the authors and publisher, citing free speech protections. And though he did not throw out the lawsuit, Warren said it has little chance of success.

 

Meanwhile, Bonds' attorneys also sent a letter Friday to U.S. District Judge Susan Illston demanding that the writers and publishers be held liable.

 

"The true victim is not Barry Bonds, but the sanctity and integrity of the grand jury process," attorney Alison Berry Wilkinson wrote.

 

The book claims Bonds used steroids, human growth hormone, insulin and other banned substances for at least five seasons beginning in 1998.

 

"We fully stand behind our reporting of the book," said Mark Fainaru-Wada, one of the authors.

 

"We certainly stand by our reporters and the reporting they did for us," Chronicle executive vice president and editor Phil Bronstein said. "Nothing that's happened will change that."

 

Spokeswoman Lisa Johnson said publisher Gotham Books supports both authors.

 

"We at Gotham Books are shocked that Barry Bonds would take such a foolish step," she said. "Any respected First Amendment lawyer in America knows that his claim is nonsense."

 

Attorney Michael Rains said Bonds will not comment directly on the lawsuit, but strongly supports the case. Bonds has refused to discuss allegations in the book.

 

"His bat speaks for himself and he's not going to speak on this action and this book," Rains said.

 

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.

well, that didn't last long

 

Barry is 0-1

Not shocking, in my opinion.

I guess I better get my copy of the book quick.

 

I'm getting mine this week.

so, has anyone read the book?