Tip of the day: When testifying, do NOT lie. Also, do NOT lie to the FBI.
Lying in Court is perjury, not smart and causes you to lose credibility with the Judge. Lying to your lawyer results in frivolous matters being filed, tried and ultimately can open you up to sanctions of the Court. Lying to the FBI gets you indicted.
lie
noun
noun: lie; plural noun: lies
an intentionally false statement.
synonyms:
untruth, falsehood, fib, fabrication, deception, piece of fiction, falsification
If you aren’t sure what the truth is then just say so. Don’t lie.
Occasionally, lawyers are in Court to give testimony. They are called as witnesses just as a party might be. Usually, the Court waives the requirement of administering the Oath.
While done as a courtesy, it does not reduce the lawyer’s obligation to be truthful. Lawyers, upon being licensed and admitted to the practice of law are under oath and have a duty to be truthful with the Court in all pleadings, appearances and interactions in their role as a lawyer with the Court.
Lawyers are not only subject to the same potential penalties for perjury, but are also subject to Bar Association discipline if lying to the Court, or otherwise violating Rules of Professional Conduct.
Your lawyer should be familiar with these rules and at least know that they exist.
Matthew Thompson is a Family Law Attorney in Mississippi and reminds Lawyers, you have to tell the truth too.
“Do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?”
All testimony is under oath. Judges apply the smell test to determine your truthfulness. Testimony that doesn’t make sense fails this test.
A man, after having been caught with his girlfriend, denied they were intimate because he could not…perform. There was testimony that he had issues in that department. However, he was also on medication for his ailments. He continued his medication even months after separating from his wife. He did NOT have a good explanation for that.
Judge knew he was NOT telling the whole truth. You can lose your credibility on something seemingly trivial. Judges listen intently and judge you. That is their job. If you lie about little things or are “cute” with your answers then they may assume you’ll lie about big things.
Matthew Thompson is a Divorce Lawyer in Mississippi and recommends you tell the truth and nothing but the truth…but only answer what is asked.
I routinely ask client questions that can be answered simply, but rarely get the simple, straight forward response.
“How much child support are you Ordered to pay?”
“”$750.00 per month.”
“Have you paid it?”
“Well, you see, I was going to, but my car broke down and then I was writing the check ,but she said I could’t get them…”
There may be a great explanation, but first things first. Did you pay? Are you in compliance with the Order? Yes or No? Then explain if needed. Don’t try to guess. Just answer what is asked.
A great tip for doing this is to practice with your attorney so that you know why the question is being asked. Said another way, begin with the end in mind.
Matthew Thompson is a Family Law Attorney in Mississippi and wants you to tell your story, but answer the question first.
This is said shortly after one party disclosed the dirty details to the child regarding the other parent. Followed by the statement, “they have the right to know.”
They do not have the Right nor need to Know.
This is never appropriate. Never. Never to a young child. What about when….? No. Never.
But what about that parent, with their righteous indignation, who says, “I do NOT lie to my child?” My response? “What about the Tooth Fairy?
I get a blank stare.
We lie to our children all the time A LiveScience.com article stated it better, “Parents Lie to Children Surprisingly Often.” This article concluded that parent’s lie to protect their child and lie to preserve some semblance of innocence and childhood for their children. These are all good things.
The Tooth Fairy question gets that indignant parent every time. There is no good reason to “tell all” about the other parent’s misdeeds. You should be telling them that “mommy” loves them very much. When the kids are older they will realize the truth and appreciate you all the more for allowing them to have a childhood and to love their other parent, even if the other parent did not deserve it.
Back to the title. When is Perjury allowed? It’s Not. It was just click bait.
Matthew Thompson is a Child Custody Attorney in Mississippi and believes sometimes lying to your children is in their best interests.
Follow the blog:#BowTieLawyer Visit the website: #Thompson Law Firm You may also contact Matthew with your family law matter or question at (601) 850-8000 or Matthew@bowtielawyer.ms
Mississippi was recently determined to be the “most corrupt” state. It appears we may be deserving of that title…
atibodyphoto /freedigitalphotos.net
A post earlier this year told of the woe of Judge Joe Dale Walker and self-dealing from the bench which lead to his removal, conviction and incarceration.
In summary, Walker instructed a federal grand jury witness to destroy documents and then Walker lied to the FBI about it.
Walker appointed a Conservator to solicit bids for the construction of a home for a ward, a litigant in his Court. Of the bids obtained, one was from the Judge’s nephew. The Judge reviewed the bids in his office and instructed his nephew to increase his bid. Walker then transferred the case to the other Judge in the district for the limited purpose of accepting and approving the bid because of his nephew’s involvement. After the contract was awarded to Walker’s nephew, the case was transferred back to Walker by the second Judge.
This conduct lead to his demise. But, the story is not over…
The second Judge, David Shoemake, is now in the hot seat over the same allegations.
Magee News
Shoemake originally denied signing the Order approving the bid. The Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance conducted an investigation into these allegations.
Concerning the order dated August 2, 2011, Shoemake testified at a Judicial Performance Show Cause Hearing, “I’ll say no, it’s not my signature. It looks like my signature. But I don’t think it’s my signature. I think it’s been transposed or cut and pasted or something.” (Ex. 4 at 30). As the questioning continued concerning that order, Shoemake grew more insistent:
Q: So you maintain that this is not your signature on the order filed on August 9th and dated August 2nd?
A: Yes ma’am, that’s what I maintain. And, if you will notice, the order that has the date August 2nd, 2011, has been cut and pasted. It’s got three computer fonts on the front page. And it tries to cut in this language from the copy of the order that she sent me at 3:59 an [sic] August 2, 2011. So the order has obviously been messed with. Somebody has cut and pasted. (Ex. 4 at 37).
Shoemake then stated, “I have never in my life signed a second page with a signature blank on it and that’s all; as a lawyer doing deeds or accepting deeds or any kind of document. I would not have signed my name on a page with my signature blank alone, because it just throws into credibility the first page. You can change the two pages, make them interchangeable.“
His testimony “changed” following a handwriting analysis. The Commission had a handwriting analysis conducted which determined that it was in fact Judge Shoemake’s signature on all Orders in controversy.
At a Formal Hearing before the Judicial Performance Commission, Shoemake admitted signing all of the orders in controversy. He argued he was justified in signing the orders after transferring the matter back to Walker because that was customary, he “didn’t see anything wrong with it at that time . . . I have jurisdiction. And judges can accommodate one another in the same district.” (T. at 202). In fact, he never gave that a second thought: “don’t remember that even being an issue.” (T. at 341). He stated he only did it because he was told that was what Walker wanted.
When was asked at the Formal Hearing why, at the prior hearing, he did not simply explain that he signed the orders because he was told that was what Walker wanted, he stated, “I can’t answer that. I don’t know.” (T. at 346).
The current allegations are limited to conduct on the bench and whether they are violations of the Cannons of Judicial Ethics.
Follow the blog: BowTieLawyerVisit the website: Thompson Law FirmYou may also contact Matthew with your family law case, question or concern at (601) 850-8000 or Matthew@bowtielawyer.ms
Ben Matlock and Perry Mason were always able to berate the real killer on the witness stand until he confessed or it just so happened that the real killer attended the Trial, sitting in the audience, just to watch, only to see himself implicated and arrested before he could leave.
Ben Matlock
However, real Court is not like TV Court. Lawyers for the most part do not have surprise witnesses that no one knows of and the real killer does not attend and watch from the gallery. Though Court is usually open to the public, rarely does anyone other than a family member attend.
Lawyers are usually held to a reasonable standard of Courtroom Etiquette and witnesses and parties are even more-so.
Courtroom Etiquette includes;
Dressing appropriately. (conservative or church attire is acceptable, shorts, sleeveless tops, & hats are not)
Acting appropriately. (No guffawing, exclaiming, gum chewing, loud talking in the audience)
Waiting for the Question to be asked before Answering. (All is being typed by the Court reporter)
Answering “Yes” or “No,” and then explaining if necessary.
Not Shouting or Yelling.
Not Cursing.
Not Lying.
Not Faking Emotion.
Court is emotional. You can have and show emotion, but the Court is going to judge the level of emotion shown based on the issues before it and will take into account stage fright. The Judge also knows, more often than not, when you are faking it.
Matthew Thompson is a Family Law Litigation Attorney in Mississippi; know when to hold, when to fold them, know when to walk away and when to run…
Follow the blog: #BowTieLawyerVisit the website: #Thompson Law FirmYou may also contact Matthew with your family law case or question at (601) 850-8000 or Matthew@bowtielawyer.ms
Testifying in Court is the most nerve-racking experience for the parties in a case. imagerymajestic /freedigitalphotos. net
The number one phobia among human beings is public speaking, not death, heights, or spiders. Evidence of this can be seen daily. Add to it the pressure of being involved in serious litigation and Courtroom Jitters are to be expected.
I have seen witnesses forget the answer to the most basic of questions due to stage fright. I had a witness forget her address, the one where she had lived for years. I’ve seen a deposition transcript where the husband going through a divorce lost his cool when asked his name. To him the question was insulting because they had been married for years. The anxiety of being in that situation got the better of him.
A colleague told me she had a witness freeze while being questioned about adultery and then lie about the affair even though he knew the other side had “it” on video! After the lie the attorney requested a short recess. The client said he panicked and just said,”NO!” ( while Nancy Reagan would have been proud, it was perjury). After the recess the opposing attorney asked to play the video to impeach the witness. The witness admitted the affair, but it was too late. The court ordered the video be played.
Matthew Thompson is a Divorce Litigation Attorney in Mississippi. Stage fright happens and is real. The best advice is avoid Court. The second best advice is prepare, prepare, prepare.
Follow the blog: #BowTieLawyer Visit the website: #Thompson Law Firm You may also contact Matthew with your family law case or question at (601) 850-8000 or Matthew@bowtielawyer.ms
(601) 850-8000 - - BowTieLawyer.MS 