All Intensive Purposes

Fans cheer a Bonds strikeout.

Chemically altered superjerk Barry Bonds says he's going to sue the San Francisco Chronicle reporters whose forthcoming book -- excerpts of which have already been in released -- details at length Bonds use of various steroids to turn himself into a historically unparalleled slugger and an even less pleasant person than he was previously. (It's not clear which of those is the more impressive feat.)

But Bonds isn't suing for libel, and it doesn't appear that he's going to argue that the reporters got anything wrong. Instead, the theory is that the reporters got their hands on materials they shouldn't have had:

"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."

Now, I don't know an awful lot about practice before a grand jury, but the notion that "laws prohibit people from possessing grand jury materials" strikes me as loopy. As far as I can tell, the applicable law provides:

(2) Secrecy.

(A) No obligation of secrecy may be imposed on any person except in accordance with Rule 6(e)(2)(B).

(B) Unless these rules provide otherwise, the following persons must not disclose a matter occurring before the grand jury:

(i) a grand juror;

(ii) an interpreter;

(iii) a court reporter;

(iv) an operator of a recording device;

(v) a person who transcribes recorded testimony;

(vi) an attorney for the government; or

(vii) a person to whom disclosure is made under Rule 6(e)(3)(A)(ii) or (iii).

Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(2). Sub-section (A) of this rule says there is "no obligation of secrecy" on the part of anybody, except as listed in sub-section (B), which lists a whole bunch of people who "must not disclose" the matters. You will note that San Francisco Chronicle reporters are not included in the categories listed in sub-sections (i) through (vii). In other words, unless I'm missing something profound, Bonds' suit is completely baseless. A desperate lunge at a pitch he can't hit before he heads back to the dugout? Journalists receive grand-jury materials all the time. Their sources are violating Rule 6, but they are not.

Having said that, let me add that Bonds is suing under a California state law notorious for the discretion it gives judges to go where no judge has gone before. And even Mario Mendoza hit four home runs.

Of course there are good reasons for grand-jury secrecy, but the irony is rich here because the book makes clear that Bonds used his appearance before the grand jury to lie, again and again. Evidently Bonds feels very strongly that he should be able to lie to the grand jury in private.