A a piece today no WattsUpWithThat, Lond Mockton is reported to have said:
This memorandum sets out evidence of falsehood with intent to mislead a court by Dr Michael E. Mann in a case in the District of Columbia against the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the National Review.
A number of times Lord Monckton is reported to have said that Mann “falsely stated” and moreover that he did so “with intent”. It appears to me that that in common parlance, this saying that Mann intentionally lied to a court and isn’t that Perjury?
Looking at the definition of “Perjury” I find:
Perjury, also known as forswearing, is the intentional act of swearing a false oath or of falsifying an affirmation to tell the truth, whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to an official proceeding.
I would assume that documents supplied to a court as part of a case would either have an express or implied affirmation that they are the truth. Looking online I find that the following relating specifically to the US:
18 U.S. Code § 1621 – Perjury generally
Whoever—
(1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or
(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true;
is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. This section is applicable whether the statement or subscription is made within or without the United States.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1621
Why does this seem so much more serious than the last article when Anthony Watts ran a piece: Michael Mann caught telling a ‘porky’ to the court (again) in legal filings? The reason is that Michael Mann has had nearly two months to correct those submissions. So, now these cannot be “omission” or “mistakes” but intentional. If as it appears, Mann has not corrected any mistake, then this can no longer be construed as an “oversight”, but must be intentional.
Or to put it another way: “To err is human – to deliberately tell lies to a court is perjury”.
Is Mann Facing Jail
Because of the serious nature of these allegations now, I suspect the proper course is to report this apparent crime to the police/court. And this is a serious crime, because it would appear to me this is a very clear case (but forgive me if I’m not familiar with US law):
whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive,
legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the
United States,
knowingly and willfully—
IV. a. falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
b. makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
c. makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any
materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/98-808.pdf
Michael Mann is looking at up to five years in the Penn. What is more, he will not win his libel case if he has committed perjury, and worse still for him personally, I cannot see any agreement with those who said they would back him standing up in court. So, Mann may well end up paying all the costs himself and going to jail with no prospect of a job afterwards.
