Baseball Musings: Leaker Revealed

February 14, 2007

Leaker Revealed

The defense attorney for Victor Conte will plead guilty to the BALCO leaks. That confirms the accusation made in December. As part of the agreement, the reporter from the San Francisco Chronicle won't go to jail. It's good to see the person who committed the crime going to jail for a change.

Update: One of the commenters wonders what will turn out to be the motivation for the leak. My guess is that Ellerman was looking for a way to get a guilty client freed on a technicality:

In March 2004, Ellerman signed an agreement that he would not disclose grand jury testimony given to him to prepare the defense. But in June of that year, he allowed Fainaru-Wada to come to his office and take verbatim notes of Montgomery, and the Chronicle published a story about the sprinter's testimony on June 24, according to court documents.
After telling Judge Susan Illston that he was angry about the leak, he filed a statement with the court swearing that he wasn't the source. And in October 2004, he filed a motion to dismiss the criminal case against Valente because of "repeated government leaks of confidential information to the media."

The following month, he again allowed Fainaru-Wada to take verbatim notes of the grand jury transcripts, this time of the testimony of Bonds, Giambi and Sheffield, the court papers show.

I find it quite distressing that the Chronicle reporters invoked Watergate in their pleas to be kept out of jail, yet were abetting a lawyer trying to commit fraud to free a client. That's a great reason to protect a source, so the source can commit a crime.

Posted by David Pinto at 09:37 PM | Cheating | TrackBack (1)

Comments

What a colossal jack-ass. Can't even figure out a motive except some sort of voyeurism and he lost his career.

Posted by: cj at February 14, 2007 10:03 PM

One thing from the story - while the guy was Victor Conte's attorney at one point, when he actually did the leaking, he was working for one of the other defendants. I assume at some point we'll find out why he did it.

Posted by: Devin McCullen at February 14, 2007 10:33 PM

This guy needs to lose his license to practice law.

Posted by: rbj at February 15, 2007 10:49 AM

"I find it quite distressing that the Chronicle reporters invoked Watergate in their pleas to be kept out of jail, yet were abetting a lawyer trying to commit fraud to free a client. That's a great reason to protect a source, so the source can commit a crime."

It also makes me wonder if the Reporters didn't do more then just accept this illegally leaked material? I have to ask the question, did the reporters make any effort to motivate the illegal leaking of this material? I am not just talking about some sort of brib, I am also asking if they tried to encourage this illegal leaking by trying to sell the then potential leaker that he might be able to turn a leak into his advantage in the criminal case against his clients. We still don't know if this leaker is the only criminal in this whole mess. The reporters could be equally guilty.

Posted by: giantsrainman at February 15, 2007 12:00 PM

Exactly. And the smallest man in all of sports, Lupica is off his telephone book(s) and onto his soapbox explaining why these jokers are American heroes.

Posted by: abe at February 15, 2007 12:52 PM

I'm delighted and extremely pleased that the reporters will not be going to jail. A free and unfettered press is an essential component of democracy, and I think a reference to Watergate is entirely appropriate.

Now, Free Josh Wolf!

http://freejosh.pbwiki.com/

Posted by: John Seal at February 15, 2007 01:07 PM

The people who kept saying that only the prosecutors could possibly be the leakers have some serious crow to eat.

Posted by: Crank at February 15, 2007 01:18 PM

Josh Wolf is right where he belongs.

Posted by: abe at February 16, 2007 03:12 PM

Lupica is actually the second smallest man in sports. You forgot about Mitch Albom.......

And the fact that you are all vilifying the reporters in this borders on comical. Let the lawyer rot but much like the cheaters themselves who seemingly have gotten off scot free, where exactly is the proof that the reporters did anything illegal? As opposed to the, oh, hundred or so major leaguers who tested positive for an ILLEGAL substance....And are amphetamines legal now, too? Just wondering.....

Posted by: boogaloo at February 16, 2007 08:27 PM

Albom's ears scare me.

Posted by: abe at February 17, 2007 01:44 PM