Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg
Against millions the other way, I suggest, admittedly without much evidence. Except this: Surely large numbers of people were convicted in court today even though there was alibi testimony. And I can't find any evidence at news.google.com of even one person who who gave testimony inconsistent with those convictions being arrested today. Googling news.google.com with search term perjury, the only group of people who seems to have much of a chance of being charged with that crime are, strangely enough to me, sporting professionals.
How good?
In the area of respect for copyright, there isn't much question that it is broken down. Whatever you think of copyright enforcement being privatized to become the responsibility of ISP's, this does indicate the justice system has broken down.
|
Just as a sidebar:
Perjury can be difficult to show because people have far worse memories than you think. Witnesses frequently give inconsistent testimony because they misremember, subconsciously edit the past to make themselves look better or create memories based on things they heard or saw after the event. So someone could have an alibi, but still be convicted because the trier of fact in the case (the judge) found someone else's testimony more credible.
Perjury has to be an intentional lie, rather than the unintentional ones that witnesses provide all the time.