Subj : Re: Here's another one
To   : Deuce
From : richardw
Date : Wed Sep 07 2005 06:14 pm

  Re: Re: Here's another one
  By: Deuce to richardw on Wed Sep 07 2005 04:09 pm

 >  >  > Of course, almost everyone who is found guilty is ALSO guilty of perju
 >  >  > Given how oten perjury isn't prosecuted (especially against the person
 >  >  > on trial) I would say the law applied just as much as to everyone else
 >  >
 >  > http://tinyurl.com/apdwm
 >  > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7222867
 >  > http://www.mapinc.org/tlcnews/v05/n091/a06.htm?160
 >  > http://www.tjpc.state.tx.us/publications/reviews/98/98-1-06.htm
 >  >
 >  > As you can see, perjury is often prosecuted.
 > 
 > None of those charges were laid against the person who was on trial when the
 > perjury was comitted.  Also, digging up isolated cases cannot prove it "ofte
 > happens (four times in seven years isn't "often")
 > 
 > http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cfjs9804.pdf
 > 
 > Has a summary of offences... you'll find that between Oct 1st, 1997 and Sept
 > 30, 1998 there were 78172 federal criminal cases.  392 of them were perjury,
 > contempt or intimidation.  (Can't find those split up unfortunately)
 > 
 > 82 of those went to trial.

So... approximately 1 in 1000 federal trial cases are regarding perjury.

That's often enough.  :-)

---
 þ Synchronet þ Eleemosynary ELF - eelf.richardw.net

.