Browse archives: 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | 1998 | 1997 | 1996 | 1995

Published on 10/26/1998 All articles from this issue

Is lying under oath, on any subject, acceptable?

printer friendly version

By Bob Norton

Other Voices

My grandson Scott, a 19-year-old college sophomore, with a group of nine other young college men and women, was attacked by a group of thugs in their mid-20s and about 30 drunken mid-high-school-age girls in a campground some distance from the University of Idaho. He was attacked from behind with fists and beer bottles, knocked unconscious and kicked unmercifully until his friends could extract him. The attack was unprovoked and similar to attacks by the same people previously.

Scott had a concussion, five missing front teeth, a broken cheekbone, a broken upper jaw and palate, cracked ribs and his cheek cut completely through. Since he had a concussion, he could not be given anything to control his pain. Four days later he underwent four hours of surgery to partially repair the damage.

My son, father of Scott, had been trying to educate Clinton apologists about the importance of truth on the Atlantic Monthly forum "Post and Riposte." Following the attack, my son posted "Should we expect the truth?" on Sept. 3. An edited excerpt from his posting is quoted below.

If Clinton's lies and perjury go unpunished what does that do to our system of justice? Can there ever again be justice coming out of our courts?

PLEASE CONTINUE WITH MY SON'S 3 OPTIONS.

"I have three choices, as a father, in dealing with those who grievously harmed the son I held when he was less than a minute old:

"1. I can thank the Lord that he will heal with few scars, not many nightmares, and the best artificial teeth money can buy, forgetting those who harmed him, secure in the knowledge that Scott will never be back at that campground, in harm's way. I'd even feel sorry for you when your son is assaulted, even crippled, by the same group. And if nothing is done, it will happen again.

"2. I can encourage and assist the police, confident that they can get to the truth, and that witnesses who know what happened yet are reluctant to talk can be compelled, under oath, to reveal who did what to Scott. For, you can be sure, there were only four or five hard-cases (maybe as few as two) who led the assault and did the damage. The other 25 or so men were hangers-on, taking their main satisfaction from the manifest violence of the ring-leaders. These people can offer the testimony to bring the brutal ones to justice.

"3. I can take care of it myself. The police know who did it. And two of them have been 'in the area' when at least three other night-time campground assaults were committed. These two were stopped by the investigating deputy, speeding away from the campground at 85 mph in a 45 zone, their right hands swollen and bleeding, perhaps broken. You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to know how he hurt his hand, to know that he broke my son's face. I can find these two. Their beer bottles and drunken fists would be no match for my Smith & Wesson.

"Pre-civilization fathers had only options 1 and 3; option 2 did not exist. Option 2 depends on the ability to gather evidence and obtain truthful testimony, even from reluctant witnesses, witnesses who would rather lie than tell the truth, if lying has no consequences.

"And you sophisticated barbarians want to take option 2 away from me. You think it is OK for someone to lie under oath if he thinks the case is nonsense, to squirm and deceive and give false impressions if some twisted logic can assert that the actual words were not 'legally' false. Perjury is no big deal, you say, it doesn't matter. We should have no expectation that someone who swears to tell the truth will actually do so because, after all, everyone lies.

"And the oath is to tell the truth: not just to avoid lying, but to tell the truth. Be sure: even if Clinton did not lie, he also did not tell the truth, hence he perjured himself. He violated a sacred, essential oath by not telling the truth.

"... That is why perjury is such a heinous crime, worse than what was done to my son. Perjury destroys civilization by destroying civilized means of resolving disputes. Why bother with the police and courts if I cannot expect people to tell the truth when they have sworn to do so? Why expect an 18-year-old to tell the truth under oath if we cannot expect it of the president?"

Please help ensure the future of justice in our system by dealing properly and forthrightly with Clinton.

Bob Norton is a Los Altos resident.