Semper Fi


  • usmcinsignianavalaviator

My Favorite Posts

« | Main | Second (and Third and Fourth) Thoughts About the Libby Indictment »

Comments

Doc Rampage

Suppose it turns out that the prosecutor was already aware that no crime had been committed when he interviewed Libby for the first time. Could Libby use the defense that he was deliberately provoked into lying by a prosecutor who was abusing his office?

Roscoe

Hi Doc.

The legal argument, as I see it, would be that the false statement or the perjury was not "material" to the investigation, which is a necessary element of both crimes. Materiality is a term of art (i.e. it has a legal meaning separate and apart from the way the word is normally used), with a very low threshold. In other words, proving that the subject about which the false statement was made was not material is a very, very, hard hill to climb.

Doc Rampage

So there's no defense in prosecutor misconduct similar to what there is for police misconduct? I mean, if the police don't read you your rights, or open your trash can without a warrant, or say "boo" during questioning to startle you, then whatever they gain from that doesn't get used against you in court. There is nothing similar if a prosecutor questions you about a non-crime just because he was trying to trap you into perjury?

That don't hardly seem fair.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Funny Stuff

The Bear Flag League

Blog powered by Typepad

Visitors