Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Kaleva

(36,244 posts)
Thu Nov 29, 2018, 10:08 PM Nov 2018

The difference between the legal perjury trap and a practical perjury trap

"The Legal Perjury Trap

As a legal defense, the “perjury trap” is a practically non-existent theory. How non-existent? So non-existent that “there are no federal cases granting a motion to dismiss because of a perjury trap.”

“There are no federal cases granting a motion to dismiss because of a perjury trap.”

Though many have tried the perjury trap defense, none have ever succeeded on the Federal level. "

"The Practical Perjury Trap.

There is a very real “perjury trap” that defendants commonly face, and that is the kind of trap Flynn actually found himself in. In such cases the defendant is guilty (or at least thinks he is). When questioned the defendant faces a dilemma, a “trap” if you will.

To answer truthfully is to confess to a crime. To lie is to commit the new crime of perjury.

The practical perjury trap is the dilemma of the guilty man who knows that to tell the truth is to confess, but to lie is to commit perjury."


https://medium.com/KeithDB/the-perjury-trap-what-it-is-and-what-it-is-not-27ca98f0bec4

Legal perjury traps are unethical (Mueller would never use such a tactic) and cases have been dismissed and convictions overturned at the state and local level because of it.

Associates of Trump, and maybe family members and even Trump himself, have been caught up in the practical perjury trap. To answer questions honestly is to admit a crime or open doors for further investigation but to lie is to commit another crime.

So when Trump loyalists are screaming about "illegal" perjury traps, they are trying to confuse the issue by getting us to think that the practical perjury traps that have taken down many Trump associates are legal perjury traps which are unethical and the use of can throw out a case.

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

ret5hd

(20,480 posts)
1. Will you please give an example of a "Legal Perjury Trap"?
Thu Nov 29, 2018, 10:15 PM
Nov 2018

I'm not seeing how someone committing perjury in any circumstance would be considered permissible for any reason.

Kaleva

(36,244 posts)
2. I think you misunderstand the use of the word "legal"
Thu Nov 29, 2018, 10:23 PM
Nov 2018

"Perjury-Trap Doctrine Law and Legal Definition

Perjury trap doctrine refers to a principle that a perjury indictment against a person must be dismissed if the prosecution secures it by calling that person as a grand-jury witness in an effort to obtain evidence for a perjury charge especially when the person’s testimony does not relate to issues material to the ongoing grand-jury investigation. The perjury trap is a form of entrapment defense, and so must be affirmatively proven by the defendant."


https://definitions.uslegal.com/p/perjury-trap-doctrine/

ret5hd

(20,480 posts)
3. So, if i read that correctly, you can't call a person to testify if the reason...
Thu Nov 29, 2018, 10:30 PM
Nov 2018

you are asking that person to testify is to get evidence of perjury.

Does that sum it up?

Kaleva

(36,244 posts)
5. That does seem to be about right. If that's the primary reason the witness was called to testify...
Thu Nov 29, 2018, 10:50 PM
Nov 2018

before a grand jury.

"A perjury trap is created when the government calls a witness before the grand jury for the primary purpose of obtaining testimony from him in order to prosecute him later for perjury."

https://definitions.uslegal.com/p/perjury-trap-doctrine/

"A “perjury trap” describes the phenomenon of a less-than-scrupulous prosecutor eliciting testimony for the sole purpose of securing a perjury conviction. In the classic example, United States v. Chen,[1] an official was asked questions about violations that were barred by the statute of limitations and then tagged with perjury. "

https://definitions.uslegal.com/p/perjury-trap-doctrine/

Takket

(21,528 posts)
4. perjury-trap is nonsence
Thu Nov 29, 2018, 10:34 PM
Nov 2018

The 5th amendment was built right into the constitution to protect us from such things. If you chose to lie anyway because you think it will "look bad" if you plead the 5th, you get what you deserve.

PoindexterOglethorpe

(25,812 posts)
7. I'm not a lawyer, and I know there's a lot about the law I don't understand,
Fri Nov 30, 2018, 12:48 AM
Nov 2018

but I find the entire concept of "perjury trap" to be nonsensical.

You're not supposed to lie under oath. If you do, that's perjury and if you get caught there are consequences. And has already been pointed out, taking the 5th is always an alternative, isn't it?

jcgoldie

(11,610 posts)
9. The best explanation I have heard...
Fri Nov 30, 2018, 01:39 AM
Nov 2018

...from a commentator on meet the press and I dont remember her name... "If I carry my wallet in my pocket is that a robbery trap?"

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The difference between th...