Lies, lies, lies
September 10, 2002, 10:44JB
Lies, lies, lies
This week, my office obtained a conviction for aggravated perjury against a defendant who swore in a writ that he was actually innocent of the sexual assault for which he was convicted. The claim was provably false (because of the defendant's multiple confessions) and he was sentenced to stacked prison time for telling that lie.
We are also trying another defendant for a similar lie (this confession was made during a tape recorded phone conversation).
Under what circumstances do you think it is proper to prosecute a writ writer for aggravated perjury?
September 10, 2002, 11:04JohnR
I guess I would want to be sure it wasn't a situation where an innocent defendant was counseled to plead guilty because it was "better" than taking his case to trial. I'm sure a past or present defense lawyer will tell me I'm wrong or stupid, but innocent defendants should never plead guilty for any reason. Period.
Other than that one situation, hang 'em. Even if they already have a life sentence. Protecting the system ensures it will work.
September 10, 2002, 16:30Greg
Good work, John. Keep it up.
September 10, 2002, 19:20JB
I have received some comments from defense attorneys suggesting that prosecuting criminals for lying is wrong. They seem to think that this inhibits them from seeking enforcement of their constitutional rights.
Is there a right to lie?
September 10, 2002, 19:30Ed Spillane
Originally posted by John Bradley:
Is there a right to lie?
Tex.C.Crim.Proc. Art. 55.03 (2).
September 11, 2002, 06:40JB
Good one, Ed.
September 11, 2002, 09:11Martin Peterson
I guess the point is that many writ writers ought to feel inhibited. The Legislature only required that the allegations be true according to the belief of the petitioner
to begin with. That seems to leave sufficient room for any valid claim. The penal provisions of our laws only have a deterrent effect when we occasionally demonstrate that they will lead to incarceration. Judicious use of the aggravated perjury statute for those creating new facts or ignoring old ones in 11.07 petitions should serve the public interest.
September 11, 2002, 10:07Terry Breen
I hate to sound like Goody Twoshoes, but I am constantly amazed at the number of people who take an oath before God to tell the truth, and then lie to your face. This has become such a problem in our grand juries, that we purchased a Bible for witnesses to put their hand on while they take the oath. We have indicted a few people for agg. perjury before the grand jury.
The problem is present during voir dire, as well. I start each voir dire now with the question: Who consideres your oath to tell us the truth to be a mere formality, and who considers it to be a promise to God Himself to tell the truth. Of course, some people will perjure themselves on that question too.
So far we have not indicted any lying veniormen, but I might in the right case.
September 11, 2002, 18:01JB
A jury returned a second conviction today for aggravated perjury. The defendant, a former police officer, lied in his writ - claiming he was innocent and that the investigating officer tampered with a recorded confession. We used an FBI expert to prove the tape had not been altered.
September 12, 2002, 07:31Richard Alpert
Isn't the proper punishment for lieing to have one's "pants caught on fire"?
September 12, 2002, 07:59Gordon LeMaire
Richard, I believe that the pants where already on fire. Thus, giving evidence of the lie.
September 12, 2002, 08:46JB
Which is it?
September 12, 2002, 08:53DPB
You are lying when you tell a lie. Therein lies the truth.
September 12, 2002, 10:29Ed Spillane
September 12, 2002, 10:56Richard Alpert
First off thanks for the priceless graphic (I'm sure it will appear in one of John's PP talks in the near future)
Do you want to be District Attorney or a School Teacher. It is true that conventional spelling shows it is spelled "Lying" but since when have your thoughts and actions been "conventional".
Finally is not the silence of a Defendant in the face of accusation a lie?
As Robert Louis Stevenson said " The cruelest lies are often told in slience"
September 12, 2002, 11:05JB
A spell-checker, my friend.
September 12, 2002, 14:40Greg
This is directed primarily at Alpert:
All the normal spelling rules apply here in Texas, however, in Louisiana, if you were lying, it would be Liar Liar Pants on Fiya. See the song and album (CD for those of you too young to remember albums) by the New Orleans Favorites, the Meters, "Fiya on the Bayou". Or the CD by the Austin Cajun Blues Rock band, Papa Mali and the Instigators, "Mighty Cootie Fiya".
Great Graphic from College Station and great work by the team in Georgetown. These two verdicts this week will have defense attorneys howling for [at least] the next year at CLE. Not to mention those conversations between jailhouse lawyers\writ writers and their "aggrieved clients".
September 12, 2002, 14:57JB
I thought it was the Neville Brothers, a later reincarnation of the Meters.
September 16, 2002, 15:00JB
For comments by defense attorneys on why criminals should be permitted to lie in a writ, see:http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/pubarticleTX.jsp?id=1030821222508
September 16, 2002, 16:43rob kepple
I notice in the article you posted, John, that a defense attorney said the Legislature may address this. That sounds spectacular -- a bill that gives a criminal defendant an absolute right to lie. That sounds like some good stuff, and I can't wait for some folks to testify about why a criminal defendant needs that protection.
But Professor Dix makes a good point -- we need to be ready to stick it to a cop if he gets caught. Like, say, the chief of police in Houston who is under indictment this moment for pergury before the grand jury....