I just despise prosecutions based upon "elusive" responses/testimony. Here is an idea -- do you fucking job as an attorney and ask specific factual questions and keep asking them until you get a reply that is either true or false.
Clinton case -- "Did Monica Lewinski ever put your penis in her mouth?" "Did you ever insert a cigar into her vagina?"
Bonds case -- Do you now admit that you took steroids? Do you claim you were taking them without knowing you were taking them? Did you ever tell ________ "boy, I really love being on the juice"? You know, shit like that.
Do your fucking job. I just cannot believe that a prosecutor can do a horsehit job as an attorney (basically commit malpractice) and then CRIMINALLY prosecute someone who gives an evasive answer.
It appears that this judge feels roughly the same way I do -- "Ooooh, 30 days house arrest, ooooh..."
if I were Bonds I would serve the effing 30 days and be done with it -- appeal or no.