Talk:Perjury

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Change in opening paragraph

Why I changed this:

It is seen as a very serious crime as it seeks to usurp the authority of the courts, because it can lead to miscarriages of justice.

To this:

In some cases it results in miscarriages of justice.

First, "it is seen as a very serious crime" is just a sneaky way of incorporating someone's POV - it still presents an opinion. Serious compared to murder? Common assault? How can you judge?

Second "it seeks to usurp the authority of the courts." This is also an opinion, since no one knows everyone's reasons for lying. Some may lie because they fear false conviction, or because they mistrust the legal establishment - not necessarily an intent to usurp authority. Besides, just to give my own POV here on the talk page, I think "usurp" is hyperbolic and "authority" is questionable - judges have power, not authority, and only perceive themselves to have any authority due to myths such as "social contract" and "democracy."

So I just left the information: it sometimes results in miscarriages of justice. The seriousness, or what the person is seeking, let readers make their own judgements.24.64.223.203 00:32, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

1. Yes, it's incorporating the societal norm POV, which is an entirely reasonable thing to incorporate provided it isn't misinterpretable as being any more than that. Which IMO it wasn't. (How can you judge the societal norm on this point? Try looking at the criminal penalties for perjury, for a start.)
2. `seeks' is a terrible choice of word, but it just needs replacing with something sensible. There's no reason to take out the whole sentence for it.

Incidentally thank you for having the forethought to give an explanation for your edit. —Blotwell 11:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

The societal norm point of view? The penalty has nothing to do with societal norms. It has to do with legal norms, which come down to the power of the legal establishment, not the power of the people (though the legal establishment loves to pretend it's "following" the will of the people). I would think that most people would consider it serious when it does lead to miscarriages of justice, but desirable when it protects people from legal bullying. In any event, "it is seen as a very serious crime" is constructed from weasel words (Generalization Using Weasel Words). How about "judges tend to consider it to be serious" or something like that?24.64.223.203 21:48, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "considered a very serious crime"

I'm thinking of changing this to "the penalties indicate that it is considered a very serious crime". which would be supported by the next sentence. i'll think about the best way to word it, and add it. -Indalcecio 21:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Martha Stewart not convicted of perjury

Martha Stewart was convicted of conspiracy, making false statements, and obstruction of justice, not perjury. Lying to investigators and lying on the stand are two separate offenses.

74.66.227.6 20:21, 18 December 2006 (UTC)Tonia Samman