• OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    Same thing happened with Mueller and all the claims of a “perjury trap.” It isn’t a trap when the prosecutor asks someone under oath if they committed a crime related to the current trial. It’s literally upholding the law.

    If the only options a defendant has, are to say they committed a crime under oath, or lie, then they did commit a crime.

    • squiblet@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Perjury trap” was definitely one of the more ridiculous things they came up with. It’s easy to not be caught in such a thing by not lying.

    • meco03211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      They still have the option to remain silent. Though this can lead to an adverse inference being drawn. Another option is like what Bill Cosby did and try to work with the prosecutor to secure some measure of immunity from criminal proceedings that could stem from your testimony in a civil trial. Personally I don’t think Cosby should have been granted any of that and just forced to face the fucking music, but rapists gonna rape I guess.