In recent corporate scandals, some executives have learned the hard way that lying is still a crime in American corporations. Martha Stewart was accused of allegedly selling her ImClone shares after obtaining inside information. However, she was not convicted of securities fraud. Instead, she was convicted of lying. In addition, Computer Associates executives have been charged and some have already pleaded guilty to lying to their own company`s lawyer during an internal investigation when their lies were leaked to the government by their lawyer. “What about lies about extramarital affairs?” asked Kagan. After all, the government has a great interest in the sanctity of the family. Director Comey`s confirmation of the existence of an investigation into Russian interference in the U.S. election and possible collusion or criminal behavior is likely to exacerbate the rhetoric.
It will be all the more tempting for critics to claim that lies about the connection with Russia constitute criminal behavior. So it`s worth taking a step back and taking a look at the laws that actually govern lying. Let`s look at the second argument, whether it`s “unfair” for Stewart to be sent to jail for lying. After all, what she did was not as serious and damaging as the behavior of other senior executives involved in some of the most notorious scandals (Adelphia, Tyco, Enron, etc.). Again, someone making this argument may not think of the full effect of accepting lies in our trial. If lying suddenly became acceptable, why would anyone tell the truth if it meant harmful consequences for himself? Certainly, we are not so naïve as to believe that it is human nature to testify against our own interests, and that we would do so automatically, even if there were no quick, grave and painful consequences if we did not tell the truth. The following is a brief review of the three main criminal lies laws that have permeated public discourse about the connection to Russia. There are legitimate reasons why we criminalize lies, but there are also dangers of going too far.
And as critical investigations against Russia continue, Congress must take the line cautiously in laying the groundwork for clear and legitimate application of criminal law when witnesses lie. Many people may be surprised to learn that they can be prosecuted if they lie to a government official, even if they are not under oath. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1001, knowingly and wilfully making a materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement about a matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the United States is a federal crime. Business people should know that the rules on lying in business are currently vigorously enforced in the United States. Contrary to the opinion of too many leaders, the rules for lying are not confusing and unclear – at least in the minds of today`s prosecutors. More recently, case after case, U.S. law enforcement officials have made it clear through their indictments and prosecutions that there is no confusion in their minds – lying is a crime. By far the most comprehensive federal law criminalizing lying is 18 U.S.C. § 1001, which makes it a crime, “knowingly and intentionally.
make a materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation” in the context of a “matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative or judicial branch” of the federal government. The testimony does not have to be under oath. But despite the values that could be promoted by strict enforcement of criminal laws against lying, there are also dangers of overcriminalizing lying. In fact, we can examine many of our own reactions to some of the alleged lies in Russia`s history to find this trend. We might ask ourselves if we are switching to “Lying is a crime!” because we are convinced and outraged by another underlying crime, or if we have carefully considered whether the case warrants criminal application. We should ask ourselves this question, because the laws described above are incredibly broad and simply cannot and will not be enforced uniformly by lies in all cases. Contrary to the impressions left by far too many commentators during the trials of Martha Stewart and Frank Quattrone and others, lying alone is a crime. Any businessman who forgets this simple truth in today`s aggressive law enforcement environment is likely to be very unpleasantly surprised.
Finally, telling lies goes from a bad decision to a violation of the law. But there are many circumstances in which it is not a legal problem, but only a personal one. Knowing when lying becomes fraud is important, if only to avoid crossing the line. Let`s take a closer look at the first argument – whether lying is a crime in America alone or not. When a witness takes the witness stand in a court case in the United States, he or she is first asked to take the following oath: “Do you swear or certify that you are telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?” Only after the Yes vote can the witness testify in a court case.
