Will You Be Shopping At Boots This...
News5 mins ago
Hypothetical Question.....
Could anyone who pleaded not guilty in court, and then subsequently found guilty by jury, then also be prosecuted for perjury having lied under oath to try to get off ?
Answers
1 to 2 of 2
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by hammerman. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
no - old one
we had a mad barrister teaching us Latin when I was 9
all not guilty means - is prove the case strictly
we learnt some Law but not much latin
Perjury is governed ( that is the q answered so I am gonna ramble now) by the Perjury Act 1906 and has met the test of time - unlike lets say the Pensions Act or the Charities Act ( 5 during the nineties ). Very little case law - it appears to be straightforward. You need an independent witness for the perjured act - that is someone other than your accuser has to see you do the act you are denying - so perverting the course of justice or conspiracy to do so is a better deal ( for the crown that is)
The other side of the coin is 'witness immunity' - I think that comes up in Crawford v Jones which is mainly about DIY lawyers ( litigants in person) where the witness is immune from suit besides perjury, conspiracy ( and a third - ? malicious falsehood )
One of my tenants has alleged to a court that I put her married name on a lease in order to defraud the authorities, ( inter alia I think they say ) - the forgetful lady didnt check to see if it were really her maiden name ( it was ). There is absolutely nothing I can do about this besides disprove it in court. Apparently I should be grateful I am able to prove my innocence !
There's British Justice for you !
Perjury is only a crime and not a tort - you cant sue someone for damages for injuries done by sworn evidence. Oh and you cant murder by perjury either - I think that is R v McHugh 1748
we had a mad barrister teaching us Latin when I was 9
all not guilty means - is prove the case strictly
we learnt some Law but not much latin
Perjury is governed ( that is the q answered so I am gonna ramble now) by the Perjury Act 1906 and has met the test of time - unlike lets say the Pensions Act or the Charities Act ( 5 during the nineties ). Very little case law - it appears to be straightforward. You need an independent witness for the perjured act - that is someone other than your accuser has to see you do the act you are denying - so perverting the course of justice or conspiracy to do so is a better deal ( for the crown that is)
The other side of the coin is 'witness immunity' - I think that comes up in Crawford v Jones which is mainly about DIY lawyers ( litigants in person) where the witness is immune from suit besides perjury, conspiracy ( and a third - ? malicious falsehood )
One of my tenants has alleged to a court that I put her married name on a lease in order to defraud the authorities, ( inter alia I think they say ) - the forgetful lady didnt check to see if it were really her maiden name ( it was ). There is absolutely nothing I can do about this besides disprove it in court. Apparently I should be grateful I am able to prove my innocence !
There's British Justice for you !
Perjury is only a crime and not a tort - you cant sue someone for damages for injuries done by sworn evidence. Oh and you cant murder by perjury either - I think that is R v McHugh 1748
1 to 2 of 2
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|