Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Quoting Myself, almost ten years on
by Ken Houghton
And this time, no one is pretending there is anything scientific or management-related about the perjury (PDF link).
Instead, the Attorney General "now [says] that he's dismayed that he may not have given the congress accurate information. UNDER OATH, I might add."
It was a simpler time. The answer to the question at the end was not clearly "yes."
Michael R. Bromwich, the Justice Department's Inspector General, raises an interesting issue ("Bad Science in the F.B.I. Lab Isn't a Crime," letter, April 22). Speaking of agents who, by the conclusions of his own report, willfully gave "flawed and inaccurate testimony" based on "bad science...and failures of management," he declares nobly that they "did not deserve being branded as criminals."
I was always of the impression that the courts consider "flawed and inaccurate testimony" to be perjury. Has the Department of Justice decided that perjury is not a criminal act?
KENNETH L. HOUGHTON
New York, April 22, 1997
And this time, no one is pretending there is anything scientific or management-related about the perjury (PDF link).
Instead, the Attorney General "now [says] that he's dismayed that he may not have given the congress accurate information. UNDER OATH, I might add."
