Yes, they are. Or such other holy book as you might subscribe to if you are, for example, Hindu, Sikh, Muslim etc etc.

You can also choose to affirm rather than take an oath, in which case it's just a non-denominational confirmation that you will tell the truth.

The net effect of lying in court after swearing an oath or affirming your evidence is the same though.

 

If you speed it's your fault, if you speed you're the person behind the wheel, irrespective of the MPH over the limit it's still speeding. Just for example if you lie in court, whether it's your name, where you were at a specific time or whether or not you were driving, it's not like they don't mention that you have to tell the truth.

I can take the attitude and stance to the thread as I've NEVER been caught speeding, nor do I speed on a regular occurance [go on say EVERYONE speeds] other than for overtaking, but if I got stopped for it I'd admit it because I have the balls to admit when I'm wrong and I'm also balanced enough to be held responsible for my actions. For a 26 yeear old I would like to say I have an 'old school' attitude, I don't expect to have things given to me nor do I expect to hide behind legal loop holes and pass off lapses of common sense as things I can't be held responsible for.

Yes the lady in question was given a harsh punishment but being a member of the community with NO parking tickets, NO speeding fines, NO criminal record and SOME self control I can say with pride "you gets what you deserves"

 

[QUOTE=Nottm_S2,May 25 2006, 05:49 AM] if a lie is a lie then is speeding speeding?

so 75 in a 70 is the same as 180 in a 30?

dunno why i've been so careful these years, it must all just result in 3 points and

 

I agree it is not black and white but obviously because we don't agree with you we are thick.

 

It is not about whether or not it is acceptable to lie, it's about the punishment being proportional to the crime.

We all lie in one way or another, and anyone who claims otherwise is on the type of drugs I wish I could get hold of.

Therefore the nature of the lie, ie I didn't steal those sweets/my wife couldn't have murdered the bank manager because she never left my side, does become the issue. Just consider what happended to Maxine Carr who was also found guilty of perverting the course of justice. Nobody complained that the sentence of 3 & 1/2 years in prison was too stiff a penalty for her.

This also leads in to the issue about whether a woman who falsley cries rape should be imprisoned. Given the 'magnitude' of the lie I would say yes.

It should be considered that a false claim of rape is not the same as a claim of rape that fails to convict due to lack of evidence.

SBC

 

I thought that this was the case, but it's too long since I last saw an episode of Judge Deed to be sure.

SBC

 

I've already stated that I couldn't remember seing in the article any reference that she had committed perjury. If you have, please would you copy it to me.

SBC

 

Lying and perjury are two very different things.

Lying is wrong, no doubt about that, but perjury can undermine the whole justice system. If she committed perjury, then she deserves what she got.

If she did not then, IMHO, the punishment is not proportional to her crime.


SBC

 

nope.. its just a debate. I didn't call anyone anything

what i am saying is that the statement 'a lie is a lie' is UTTER rubbish. it's a case of not thinking before typing in my opinion but maybe I am wrong.

archer got 4 years for perjury so should she have got 4 years too?

No. She should have got the ban she was trying to dodge, doubled with a double fine if need be. It sends out a message that if you lie about your speeding ticket you'll suffer

which is fair.

as opposed to a prison sentence which is not.

 

Interesting point.

I think sending them to jail is a bit harsh, but you only have to do it a few times to put others off. Espically those money grabbing scum, who think they can get some cash out of another Premiership footballer. On saying that it must be very hard to prove whether they were lying. Does anyone here think they could easily make that call?

There is another way of dealing with lying. It won't be popular, but here goes.

If the "victim" is found to be lying without a shaodow of a doubt, then let the media drag her/his name through the papers. If the victom has been raped, then the law needs to protect their identity, from the media. And the criminal gets some time behind bars.