Good Day Sunshine: Adam Jones, Barry Bonds and the Burden of Proof

By: D.K. Wilson

We have a serious disconnect here in the land of the not-so free and the home of the brave few in the sporting world. This is the arena where judgment is laid down before the judging is done. This is the place where opinion matters far more than truth. The place where strangers swear they know - and those knowing are far too often silent.——————–

David Roger of the Clark County district attorney’s office (Las Vegas, NV) has charged Tennessee Titans cornerback Adam Jones with two counts of “felony coercion.” Jones is charged with punching a woman (stripper) in the face “two or three times,” with biting a man (security guard) on the leg, and making a gesture that the same man interpreted as pulling a gun.

Roger, according to Rich Eisen of NFL Network, alleges that Jones was the chief instigator of the fight.

But:

Sources say that Jones voluntarily submitted his DNA to Las Vegas police “more than a month ago” to determine whether Jones could be linked to DNA that was gathered in connection with the fight inside the club and a shooting outside that left a strip club bouncer paralyzed. Jones gave saliva samples to Las Vegas police, who traveled to Atlanta, Jones’ hometown, to collect it.

Jones’ DNA sample twice has returned negative results for what apparently included an allegation of a bite during the fight, [Michael] Huyghue (Jones’ agent) confirmed. The incident occurred during NBA All-Star weekend in February.

“I guess they were hoping it was him,” he said.

No one is saying that Jones shouldn’t break out in hives at the sight of a strip club. And no one is claiming that Jones’ actions in relation to his employment in the NFL are anything less than mind numbing. And I don’t want to hear how Adam Jones should be able to do whatever the hell he wants to do. Yeah, and in this perfect world in which we live people advance based on the merits of their work, and in this perfect world no one is hungry and every person actively looks out for the welfare of their fellow person. And what drugs did you say you do?

But.

The DNA evidence is what? Negative? But he’s being charged with biting the same man he just tested negative for biting?

But? Unless there’s some sort of incontrovertible video evidence to the contrary, there is something more at work here than meets the eye. Why is this so important?

On the face of the matter, the only evidence that is not “he said-he and she said” and completely subjective in its nature is the bite allegation. And if Jones’ DNA results twice showed that he, in fact, did not bite the security guard, then what are the charges?

Now, who has the burden of proof in this case again?

——————–

This leads us out west for another round of discussion about Mr. Evil Incarnate, Barry Lamar Bonds. In and around the San Francisco Giants clubhouse Bonds is the focal point of - “the sports disconnect.”

There are many people who visit this site and plenty more who refuse to read me because of the misnomer that my writing is too black athlete-friendly; that I refuse to see the truth before my eyes about any black athlete.

Let me tell you what I refuse to do: I categorically refuse to condemn anyone without real evidence for condemnation. That way is too easy, too sheep-like, and just too damn lazy. Let me ask all of you who believe what you read and hear about Barry Bonds: how many of those people who you read and listen to, those people who swear Barry Bonds is guilty as not charged, actually know Barry Bonds? How many of those people have been around Bonds anywhere other than at a public event? How many of them can say they are friends of Bonds? The answer to all of those questions is - none.

Here’s another question about Bonds that needs to be answered - another question that somehow escaped the mainstream media’s attention. The question: if Bonds is innocent, why didn’t he sue Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams, the co- authors of Game of Shadows for libel instead of for their profits from the book?

If you listened to the “experts” and the “authorities” and the “pundits” - you know, those people you think know Bonds so damn well - you answer, “because Bonds doesn’t care about anything other than the money.” You answer, “because Bonds knew if he sued them for libel - or slander - he’d be exposed as a steroid, HGH, G-using fraud. Yeah, that’s why!”

Wrong.

Truth is, Bonds’ lawyers filed the suit in his home state of California, as they are required to do. If Bonds’ attorneys filed a libel or slander suit against Fainaru-Wada and Williams, the burden of proof falls on Bonds to prove he was slandered or that there were libelous activities engaged in by the authors. However, if Bonds’ attorney’s file an unfair competition suit that impinges on the authors’ financial gain from the book, the burden of proof shifts to the authors.

And of course I’m going to provide proof. This is a comment from Rick Karcher of the Sports Law Blog in response to a reactionary post in the Sports Law Blog written by fellow attorney Michael McCann:

Michael,

Interestingly, the California Supreme Court has held that the First Amendment is not a defense to an unfair competition claim when the defendant has published statements that constitute “commercial speech,” and the Cal. Sup. Ct. has articulated a 3-part test to determine what constitutes commercial speech (and Bonds has a good argument that all 3 parts have been met here). Thus, I think Bonds asserted the proper claim because he doesn’t have to prove falsity and that the authors published the statements with reckless disregard for their truth or falsity (as he would be required to do in a libel suit). [emphasis mine]

How many of you knew this? The better question is, why did you not know?

As those who do read my stuff know, as significant evidence on the Bonds case is reported I report it and discuss it at The Starting Five just as I did when I wrote on my own blog, SOMM. With the substantiated evidence presented, there is no reason whatsoever for me to, for one second, attempt to claim that Bonds is guilty of anything other than a media smear job inspired by one IRS agent’s obsession with his own hatred of Barry Bonds.

It is disturbing that evidence is bypassed for subjectivity in the discussion of Bonds’ alleged performance-enhancing drug use. His hat size and shoe size is the latest mirage trotted out as “proof” that Bonds indeed used HGH or GH. And yet. Not one soul dares mention that this growth is natural for a man as he ages into his late 30s and 40s.

Why?

It’s so much easier to spout opinion than it is to perform even a modicum of research to discern the truth, that’s why. Opinion is what the shock jocks of radio and the Internet love to rely on instead of reality. Opinion allows them to gain notoriety and with it a following, the trappings of an instant gratification society. Opinion allows them to tell the yarn as it is constructed in their heads - tall-tale tellers of malfeasance and mistrust. Most importantly, opinion as a replacement for fact allows these people to hide behind their biases. With too many reporters and Bonds the bias springs from the fact that they report “the life of Barry” as if they are privy to his every thought. Many of these reporters are the same ones who touted former Pittsburgh Pirates centerfielder Any Van Slyke as the messiah of Pittsburgh in the late 1980s and early 1990s while he stood 15 yards from the best player in baseball. Many more do not have the sense of history to know or acknowledge this truth of Bonds’ past, so they recycle passed down misconceptions.

And then they have the nerve to become indignant when Bonds treats them more like objects of disdain than humans.

With the sycophant shock jocks both radio and Internet, they suck the information blisters from those who will swear they saw Bonds deliver a right cross to the jaw of a 10-year old who asked him for an autograph, then tip the wheel chair of the child’s great-grandmother whose one last request was to witness the greatest player in today’s baseball - all that on the way into the clubhouse for a big steroid shot just before game time: ‘I could tell he just did a shot, his cap fit tighter on his head than it did before he took batting practice.’

When confronted with the truth these people scramble like vampires in the face of sunrise. They claim they are only entertainers, only bloggers. Suddenly they don’t want to be taken seriously. When they were thrown a bone and “scooped” the mainstream on some crumb of information the week before, they were proud, chests puffed out independent journalists. When pimp-slapped with the truth they throw up their twitching hands like spastic gang bangers facing an enemy’s arsenal, struggling to disavow any knowledge of the word journalism, let alone the field.

I do not care one whit whether or not Barry Bonds or Adam Jones or Roger Clemens, or some 25th man, 165-pound utility player on the Pirates roster is on steroids. I have no vested personal interest in any of them. However, I do care that I represent each player responsibly. Should substantiated evidence point to their using performance-enhancing drugs, then I will report it. Until then I refuse to believe anyone who avers they are using these substances just because they’ve covered them for years or even, as one longtime sports writer told me privately, “because I know how he [Bonds] thinks.”

I am not sorry that I will take evidence over innuendo and subjectivity. And for all those whose currency is opinion and personal bias and subjectivity, the truth is far more surreal than is fiction - and far more fun to convey.

Recently, I asked why no one said ‘boo’ when tennis great Andre Agassi, at age 32 to 33, added 20 pounds of muscle to his slender frame; he added even more weight from 33 to 35. All I read were stuttering replies of, ‘I-I-I don’t know Andre Agassi. I-I-I don’t know anything about Andre Agassi.’

So, what makes you think you know Barry Bonds?

addendum: In the online version of The Hill, the following question was put to various Congresspeople: Are you rooting for Barry Bonds to break Hank Aaron’s home run record? Though most of the answers are throwaways, check out the basis most of these representatives used to say they do not want Bonds to hit 756:

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.): “No, I think until the steroids thing is cleared up I can’t be an advocate for Bonds. I’ve been an advocate for children to have role models in sports that they can truly look up to.”

Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.): “No! Until I’m sure he didn’t use steroids, I don’t want him to get it, but if he’s doing it legally, great.”

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.): “No, I’m actually not.”

“Until I’m sure he didn’t…?!”

“I think until the steroids thing is cleared up…?!”

Even under the Capitol dome in the halls of Congress there is the presumption of guilt before innocence can be claimed. What is the name of this country again?

Tags: , , , ,

D.K. Wilson is a freelance sports writer. He is better known on the internet as "DWil," and writes for Sports On My Mind.

Share This Article

No Comments

No comments yet.

Comment On This Article