The evidence are the results of blood and urine tests conducted by the Bay Area Laboratory Cooperative (BALCO) in 2003. Federal prosecutors contend the test results will prove Bonds used steroids and ergo lied to a grand jury in 2003 when he said he wasn't on the juice.
Judges threw out the evidence because it constitutes hearsay testimony, they said. Greg Anderson, Bonds's former trainer and friend, conducted the tests but has refused to authenticate them or testify against Bonds (Anderson spent 13 and a half months behind bars as a result). Without Anderson's testimony, the test results are hearsay, and ultimately useless.
Prosecutors argued that Anderson was acting as Bonds's employee, and thus the test results should be allowed in court. But in perhaps the finest piece of legal writing ever, Circuit Judge Mary Schroeder wrote, "Rather than exercise control over Anderson's training program, Bonds testified that he had a 'Dude, whatever' attitude to Anderson's actions."
The U.S. Attorney's Office can appeal upstairs to the U.S. Supreme Court, and while we'd love hearing Antonin Scalia say, "Dude, whatever," we're not sure how much more of a stomach the Department of Justice has for BALCO. With everyone else seemingly turning their attention elsewhere, how much cash and resources can the DOJ commit to pursuing charges against a retired baseball player?
Follow us on Twitter at @TheSnitchSF and @SFWeekly