There's an old saying that hard cases make bad law. It is also true that cases brought because the defendant is a despicable a****le make for *really* bad law. This particular charge--the only one that the utterly incompetent federal prosecution of the much despised Mr. Bonds managed to get a conviction on--basically amounts to the legal team seeking a felony conviction for their own ineptitude at questioning a witness. There are many tools available to extract an answer from a witness who is not being responsive, and the attorney in charge of the questioning apparently couldn't be bothered to use any of them. The world will not end if Barry Bonds is forced to spend a month under house arrest, or even if he ends up with a felony conviction on his record--but if this case is upheld on further appeal it will constitute a precedent that could come back to haunt people who *aren't* Barry Bonds, but rather witnesses in other cases where the prosecution seeks a shady means of leverage over them and can facilitate it through intentional bad lawyering. Like the rest of this whole titanic waste of money and abuse of prosecutorial discretion, the privilege of making Barry Bonds' life miserable just isn't worth the pricetag for the rest of us.