decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Contempt | 687 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Contempt
Authored by: Ed L. on Monday, April 30 2012 @ 07:49 PM EDT
I'm not arguing one bit of that. If I were a juror I would have listened attentively to Mr. McNealy right to the point he claimed Mr Schwartz didn't speak for "the company" on his corporate blog, and zoned out the rest. But perjury is a criminal offence, requiring the statement in question:
  1. Be factually wrong.
  2. Be made knowing it was factually wrong.
  3. Have a material effect on the outcome of a judicial proceeding.
  4. Be made with the intention of having such effect.
Again, I'm not a lawyer, but from Wikipedia's entry on perjury:
Perjury, also known as forswearing, is the willful act of swearing a false oath or affirmation to tell the truth, whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to a judicial proceeding.[1] That is, the witness falsely promises to tell the truth about matters which affect the outcome of the case. For example, it is not considered perjury to lie about one's age unless age is a factor in determining the legal result, such as eligibility for old age retirement benefits...

Statements of interpretation of fact are not perjury because people often make inaccurate statements unwittingly and not deliberately.[citation needed] Individuals may have honest but mistaken beliefs about certain facts, or their recollection may be inaccurate. Like most other crimes in the common law system, to be convicted of perjury one must have had the intention (mens rea) to commit the act, and to have actually committed the act (actus reus). Subornation of perjury, attempting to induce another person to perjure themselves, is itself a crime.

Serious stuff. While I find myself in violent sympathy with your contempt -- the subject of this thread -- I repeat my suggestion Mr. McNealy covered his himself in his testimony, to the effect:
I sincerely believe Jonathan's Blog does not convey the official word of a corporate officer. I thought it a personal blog and never bothered to read it. Having never done so, there is no way I could have known that Mr. Schwartz intended otherwise. And it is still my honest opinion that such personal blogs do not and cannot speak for the company.
And without legal precedent to the contrary, who's to say Mr. McNealy, legally speaking (which is what counts in perjury), is even wrong?

Yes, I'm being argumentative. When someone accuses another of criminal conduct, I like to play the "but what if it ain't?" game. But as you observed in another comment, Mr. McNealy's credibility is now a matter for the jury.

And I wish them luck with it.

:-)

---
Real Programmers mangle their own memory.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )