Case library · Cover-Up
The Rambling Answer
United States v. Bonds (2015)
Charge: Obstruction of justice (evasive grand-jury testimony)Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (en banc)State: CaliforniaDocket: Cover-Up
The facts
A professional baseball player was called before a grand jury investigating a laboratory accused of supplying steroids to athletes. He was asked whether his trainer had ever given him anything to inject with a syringe. Instead of answering, he gave a long, wandering reply about growing up as an athlete's son and not wanting to discuss other people's business. He never said yes or no. Prosecutors say the evasive answer was meant to obstruct the investigation. The law requires the statement to be material, meaning able to influence the grand jury.
You have the facts the court had. Guilty or not guilty? Call it in the game with your friends, then see what the court actually decided. Wrong call, you drink.
Citation: United States v. Bonds, 784 F.3d 582 (9th Cir. 2015) (en banc)
Read more at law.justia.com. The source reveals the outcome.