Latest delay isn't necessarily good news for Bonds

SI.com caught up with Sports Illustrated legal expert Lester Munson to talk about the latest news concerning the federal grand jury, which is hearing charges against Barry Bonds.

	Barry Bonds may be fighting legal battles long after his playing career ends. Robert Laberge/Getty Images
	RELATED • New grand jury to convene; probe continues • HEYMAN: Execs see Bonds playing in 2007 • Bonds in limbo as grand jury fate awaits • Who's who in the BALCO scandal? • Barry Bonds-BALCO chronology • BOOK EXCERPT: Game of Shadows • GALLERY: Growing Legacy of Barry Bonds

SI.com: Everything we had heard made it seem as though the federal prosecutors were building toward asking for an indictment of Barry Bonds this week. Are you surprised they did not?

Lester Munson: Yes, I am surprised. All of the signs indicated an indictment today. The prosecutors have decided to convene a new grand jury in an attempt to gather more evidence, and the evidence they are seeking includes testimony from Greg Anderson, Bonds' personal trainer who was jailed for refusing to testify.

SI.com: What can we expect now in the investigation?

Munson: The federal prosecutors will continue to push Anderson for testimony. They will use contempt of court to keep him in jail until he decides to testify. Even though he was released on Thursday, the government can ask to have him locked up again until he decides to testify. It will be up to Anderson to decide if he is willing to spend as long as 18 months in jail to protect Bonds.

SI.com: Does this delay in any way show a weakness in the government's case?

Munson: No, I don't think it shows a weakness. It shows that the government is being very careful to make sure it has pursued every possible opportunity to gather evidence before reaching the indictment stage. And it has been a long and massive investigation. There is a lot of material but they are trying to gather even more material on use of steroids, possible perjury and possible tax fraud. They must have some idea that they can persuade Anderson to testify by keeping him locked up. They already have his former mistress, Kimberly Bell, and his former best friend, Steve Hoskins, who are both cooperating, as well as the mountain of evidence that has been reported by the San Francisco Chronicle and Game of Shadows, and the prosecutors are still looking for more. I think he is going to face charges of perjury in the steroid investigation or tax violations or both. It's not over and he's still in big trouble.

SI.com: When can we expect a conclusion to the investigation?

Munson: It is impossible to predict. Most observers agree that the investigation could have been concluded as long as a year ago. One of the surprises in this saga is how long it has taken and how much time and energy the government agents have invested in this process. This is beyond standard procedure. They are taking a longer time and being more careful in the Bonds investigation than they would be in a typical investigation. They've done a huge amount of work. It has taken a long time and now it's going to take longer, so it is an exceptional investigation in that sense.

SI.com: Is it difficult or unusual to ask a grand jury to remain in session beyond its expiration date, or to convene a new grand jury?

Munson: No. It's just a matter of the prosecutor going through a little ritual with the chief judge, but you always get it if you ask.

SI.com: Speaking on general terms here, once a prosecutor asks a grand jury for an indictment, what is the likelihood that it will be granted?

Munson: A grand jury voting no on an indictment that the prosecutor wants is a one in 10,000 scenario. They almost always say yes. So really this is just a matter of the government making sure it has its ducks in a row before asking for the indictment.

SI.com: As a matter of procedure, is it possible for the government to take the evidence it has gathered via this grand jury and file charges without asking for an indictment from the grand jury itself?

Munson: Yes, that's called an "information" -- a charge made by the U.S. attorney in a district court, as opposed to an indictment, which can only be filed by a grand jury. The reason for the use of a grand jury is that it has subpoena power and that makes it easier for the government to get testimony. An "information" happens frequently in tax cases, though it would probably never happen in a perjury case.

Top Photo Galleries Rafael Nadal Through Time Did You See That? 100 Memorable Olympic Moments The NHL's Great Game 7s Best Players Without An NBA Title

Most Popular Stories Is age catching up to Halladay? Jessica Lucas; Jon Beason calls out Alex Smith for knocking Cam Newton: Hot Clicks Knicks' Smith arrested in Miami Royals' Moustakas leading charge of rising sophomores Wagenheim: Ex-champ Velasquez hopes to restore winning ways at UFC 146