|Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 22 2012 @ 09:52 AM EDT|
|More prosecutions for perjury. . . . |
"A crime that occurs when an individual willfully makes a false statement
during a judicial proceeding, after he or she has taken an oath to speak the
"willfully" . . . probably can be tortured into a very high bar to
from the Model Penal Code:
"the following basic elements for the crime of perjury: (1) a false
statement is made under oath or equivalent affirmation during a judicial
proceeding; (2) the statement must be material or relevant to the proceeding;
and (3) the witness must have the Specific Intent to deceive."
Likely much easier in a civil case to perjure without consequences . . ..
there's no prosecutor representing the state (and it's penal code) in the court
room. So who's going to bring charges other than the presiding judge? And most
do not seem interested in recommending charges to the DA's office.
Even if lies are kept to a minimum, there's a lot of dissembling going on in
civil trails. . . too much.
The plaintiff's case maybe built entirely on false appearances.
SCO vs Novell went through the courts for six years. . . even though the basis
for SCO's claims, the 2nd amended purchase agreement, did not include a list of
any additional assets transferred. . . as required by federal code, in order to
avoid exactly what Novell went through for six years.
SCO maybe a carcass on the roadside now . .. but in many ways they
"won". They appropriated income that belonged to Novell . . . that's
theft. They got away with smearing the reputations of both Novell and IBM. And
were then allowed to hide away in bankruptcy court . . . even though they were
not bankrupt, at least by any common sense use of the word.
Of course, bankruptcy court is where an ugly justice was served . . . SCO got
eaten alive. . .. while the defendants, Novell and IBM, were left with nothing
but huge legal expenses.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]