Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

perjury!!

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • perjury!!

    What do you do about trooper that lies in court about the fact and events of a traffic case??

  • #2
    Originally posted by andreas
    What do you do about trooper that lies in court about the fact and events of a traffic case??
    I know you don't post the question on a cop forum, you're not going to like the answers you get.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by andreas
      What do you do about trooper that lies in court about the fact and events of a traffic case??
      You may find to your surprise that the whole event was videotaped. Then who would be the liar?

      Comment


      • #4
        If the testimony was recorded and there's absolute facts that the trooper was dishonest, it would be referred to the local prosecutor for review.
        Three Stripes beats Four Aces.
        Retirement: You've Won the War when you're Paid to Stay at Home.

        Comment


        • #5
          You stand up in court and scream "LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE!!!" and then say your going to hold your breath util the ticket is dismissed.

          Ultimately, without proof that he's lying there is nothign you can do.
          Two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by andreas
            What do you do about trooper that lies in court about the fact and events of a traffic case??
            More details of your situation are needed to give you a valid response.

            In any case, you need to know that perjury only occurs when you deliberately lie about a material fact. For example in an assault case, if someone testified that the sky was red when it really blue, it would not be perjury unless the color of the sky was somehow relevant in proving whether an assault occurred.

            In addition, when it comes to deciding what is the truth and what is is lie, the courts routinely give this instruction to jurors:

            Sometimes a witness may say something that is not consistent with something else he or she said. Sometimes different witnesses will give different versions of what happened. People often forget things or make mistakes in what they remember. Also, two people might see the same event but remember it differently. You may consider these differences, but do not decide that testimony is untrue just because it differs from other testimony.
            Going too far is half the pleasure of not getting anywhere

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by andreas
              What do you do about trooper that lies in court about the fact and events of a traffic case??
              Andreas,

              It depends on your jurisdiction. First and foremost report it to the Attorney General or District Attorney. Secondly, have documentation or testimony of what was lied to the court about and facts to back it up. Otherwise, you're going to be in deep doo-doo and subject to a civil lawsuit for slander. If that doesn't work, use the media but you better be darn sure about your claim otherwise, you're going to have a very long ordeal.

              Perjury is a serious crime and judges hate when people, especially public servants do it because it gives their court room a bad reputation and that is one thing a judge does not want; at least here in NYC such is the case.

              Just as an FYI, you're posting in an LE website, the answers you are seeking may not come forthright.

              Good luck.

              Comment


              • #8
                I thought the proper answer was to chalange him to a duel, have your "Second" and his "Second" set the time, place and weapons, then try to kill each other like civilized people.

                May G0D preserve the Righteous. Amen

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by andreas
                  What do you do about trooper that lies in court about the fact and events of a traffic case??
                  Are you talking about a real lie ...
                  ...
                  or is it just that he knows more than you'ld like, is able to back it up, and is willing to repeat his info on a witness stand and it's somehow causing you to have to suffer consequences for your own actions that you thought you could evade?

                  Perhaps even it's just his objective view of the facts versus your more self serving subjective view?

                  In any case ... if you really believe the officer is lying, be sure you can support that claim before making it in public.

                  Originally posted by Raiden
                  It depends on your jurisdiction. First and foremost report it to the Attorney General or District Attorney. Secondly, have documentation or testimony of what was lied to the court about and facts to back it up. Otherwise, you're going to be in deep doo-doo and subject to a civil lawsuit for slander. If that doesn't work, use the media but you better be darn sure about your claim otherwise, you're going to have a very long ordeal.
                  If you go to the media whores, you better be more than just "darn sure" ...

                  ...
                  or else you are going to make some poor trooper ...

                  ... just a little bit richer.


                  "That's right man, we've got mills here that'll blow that heap of your's right off the road."

                  "Beautiful Daughter of the Stars."(it's my home now)

                  >>>>> A Time for Choosing <<<<<

                  Retired @ 31yr 2mo as of 0000 hrs. 01-01-10. Yeah, all in all, it was good.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by t150vsuptpr
                    If you go to the media whores, you better be more than just "darn sure" ...

                    ...
                    or else you are going to make some poor trooper ...

                    ... just a little bit richer.


                    Touche, touche!!!!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Real life? Yes.

                      In a recent case which I defended, I question officer "S" as to whether or not he had physically assaulted my client by punching him repeatedly in the kidney area. His answer was that neither he nor any other officer punched the accused. I then got to question officer "R" who, when asked if he had punched my client repeatedly, answered:- "No, that was "S". Interestingly enough, 2 Crown witnesses testified that, in actual fact, there were 2 officers seen to punch the accused in the lower back. In your opinion, does this constitute perjury? Oh, by the way, all the judge did was comment that she questioned the "inconsistencies" in the evidence provided by the 2 officers. No mention was made of perjury and, as usual, the Crown (In U.S., the D.A.) ignored the obvious attempts to mislead the court. And then we wonder why the public has lost its confidence in the general administration of Justice. Had that been Joe citizen on the stand, the Crown would have been all over him. Why the double standard? In another similar case, the presiding Justice commented that he had the impression "that the officers were reading from a very well prepared script". These 2 cases were in 2 different cities in Ontario. Obviously, therefore, this is not un uncommon occurrence.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Criminal defense lawyers never try to intentionally mislead a jury or misrepresent the facts of a case, though, right MrJustice?
                        "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
                        -Friedrich Nietzsche

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by MrJustice
                          In a recent case which I defended, I question officer "S" as to whether or not he had physically assaulted my client by punching him repeatedly in the kidney area. His answer was that neither he nor any other officer punched the accused.
                          Wow, that's a real eye opener. An attorney assuming the cop is lying and their honest, law abiding, client must be the one telling the truth. A real shocker there. My entire world view is shaken.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by MrJustice
                            In a recent case which I defended, I question officer "S" as to whether or not he had physically assaulted my client by punching him repeatedly in the kidney area. His answer was that neither he nor any other officer punched the accused. I then got to question officer "R" who, when asked if he had punched my client repeatedly, answered:- "No, that was "S". Interestingly enough, 2 Crown witnesses testified that, in actual fact, there were 2 officers seen to punch the accused in the lower back. In your opinion, does this constitute perjury? Oh, by the way, all the judge did was comment that she questioned the "inconsistencies" in the evidence provided by the 2 officers. No mention was made of perjury and, as usual, the Crown (In U.S., the D.A.) ignored the obvious attempts to mislead the court. And then we wonder why the public has lost its confidence in the general administration of Justice. Had that been Joe citizen on the stand, the Crown would have been all over him. Why the double standard? In another similar case, the presiding Justice commented that he had the impression "that the officers were reading from a very well prepared script". These 2 cases were in 2 different cities in Ontario. Obviously, therefore, this is not un uncommon occurrence.
                            Was the defendant guilty?
                            Fear not the armed citizen but rather the government that tries to disarm him.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              A defendant's guilt or lack thereof is one issue.

                              The credibility of the testamony offered to prove the state's case is another.

                              If one officer's testamony is directly contradicted by another's then yes, it is a very good day.

                              Does it mean anyone/everyone is lying? No.
                              Does it mean that we may have found reasonable doubt? Very possible the answer is yes.

                              The state has to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. If the state's wittnesses contradict each other, hell yes, I'm going to be on that like a wet T-shirt on a pair of firm...

                              What would you like the defense attorney to do? Ignore an obvious contradiction in evidence and not use it to its best advantage?

                              If the State puts on wittnesses that want to contradict each other...who am I to argue?

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 8124 users online. 438 members and 7686 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 26,947 at 07:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X