Perjury in domestic violence cases

jumpingjackflash

A friend of mine (male) is due in court for a protection order, the person (female) who applied for it is more than capable of lying and has no issues in doing so.

My friend has noticed that details of events on the affidavit with the application have been changed to suit the applicant.

Could proving this in court be used to help avoid the safety order? Would it be classed as perjury as it was sworn before a judge?

just a general question I have about this, not looking for legal advice

Peregrinus

When you say that details in the affidavit have been "changed" — are there two versions of the affidavit, containing inconsistent details?

jumpingjackflash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120446386#Comment_120446386

No, details were changed regarding the contents of a message used to obtain a protection order against my friend until the court date for the safety order. just as an example (not the actual text of the message)

if the message that was received by the applicant from a friend of the respondent stated, the respondent "shoved a guy out of the way on a night out" but in the affidavit it was stated the message said the respondent "knocked a guy out with a baseball bat on a night out" The respondent has the original message (proof) stating "shoved a guy on a night out" could this be classed as perjury as it is a sworn statement made before a judge?

my friend is extremely worried that their ex with exaggerate more claims when it comes to the court case.

Peregrinus

I wouldn't get hung up on trying to prove that somebody perjured themselves here. Perjury is very difficult to prove and family law proceedings are not the place in which to prove it. With perjury, the focus is on the knowledge and intent of the person making the false statement, and proving what somebody's state of mind was is difficult.

The important thing here is to show the court that the affidavit is not reliable. You do not need to go into whether the reason for this is dishonesty, or malice, or just mistaken recollection, or people persuading themselves of what they want to believe; that is not important.

So, yeah, by all means introduce evidence of what actually happened on the night out, and show that the affidavit presents a skewed, highly-coloured and not unreliable picture. Just avoid the word perjury, and avoid accusing anybody of dishonesty. It's not relevant to the issue before the court. Plus, it makes you seem like the dispassionate, fair, reliable person; if you're trying to make the focus what a terrible person your ex is, you look just as angry as your ex does.

jumpingjackflash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120446404#Comment_120446404

so what you're saying is, basically the applicant can alter events to suit their needs in family law and it's accepted?

I only asked if it could be classed as perjury since details were enhanced for the affidavit, not accusing of perjury just wondering.

This is not my ex thank god!

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120446408#Comment_120446408

No, I'm saying the opposite. The respondent can challenge what the applicant says and respondents frequently do. You just don't have to characterise it as "perjury" in order to challenge it, and it's probably wiser not to. Call it "perjury" puts the focus on the intentions of the applicant, which aren't relevant and are hard to prove, rather than the factuality of the statement, which is relevant and is much easier to prove.

jumpingjackflash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120446421#Comment_120446421

so if for example if at the hearing, the applicant changes more details from their affidavit while testifying. could this be challenged as the applicant being unreliable?

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120446696#Comment_120446696

Yes, certainly. If someone gives evidence at a hearing which is at variance with their previous sworn statements, that can be pointed out and they can be cross-examined about that. And you could make submissions to the judge about how that should affect the weight to be placed on their evidence.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120446696#Comment_120446696

Everyone describes events in the most favorable light for themselves that goes to the form of words used, the impressions given and the conclusions drawn. That does not mean that they are tellings or committing perjury. It’s up to the court to decide who provides the most reliable version of events. There is a very big difference between me saying you pushed John, you saying you stumbled into John and me saying I was never there if I was. The first to are an impression and the last on is a fact.

jumpingjackflash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120446789#Comment_120446789

The events in your example describe two individuals describing their versions of events. my original question was in relation to an applicant who has stated details on their affidavit sworn in front of a judge, who then proceeds while under oath testifying, to change the details as stated in their affidavit.

affidavit: John pushed me

testifying: John punched me

based on this would it be reasonable enough to show unreliability in their facts? obviously in this example it is only one instance of showing facts that were changed, I would hope that the more facts that can be shown to have changed between affidavit and testifying, the stronger the case for unreliability from the applicant's testimony.

Peregrinus

There can be a blurry line between a push and a punch, if we're honest, so this isn't quite on the same level as flat contradiction or inconsistency between the earlier and later statements. But if there's a number of such discrepancies, you can use them to suggest that, um, memories seem to have become more dramatic as time passed and the dispute intensified, and the earlier and less highly-coloured account of what happened is probably the more reliable one. I think that kind of approach would get you much further than arguing that, when a push is recalled as a punch, it means someone must be perjuring themselves.

jumpingjackflash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120446946#Comment_120446946

ok bad example on my part, but lets say it was involving a period of time for example if the applicate states in their affidavit sorry their sworn statement for the protection order, that they were attacked 5 times in a period of 12 weeks. While testifying they state they were attacked 7 times in 4 weeks. could this be perceived as a flat contradiction, inconsistency between the earlier and later statements or that they are perjuring themselves?

Redders8282

I haven't read all the comments but one piece of advice is tell your friend to get a solicitor. I am all for defending yourself in criminal cases but when it comes to Family Law, a good solicitor is worth their weight in gold.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120446881#Comment_120446881

It’s exactly the same thing, you have been watching too much court room drama!

The judges don’t live in a vacuum, they know people present the facts in the most favorable light for themselves, forget what they said in a statement etc… and they will take those things into consideration in forming an opinion of the person and the events. You are not going to hang anyone out to dry on a form of words and some miss statements. And remember you are painting a picture of yourself at the same time!

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120447422#Comment_120447422

The number of times and frequency is not necessarily a knockout blow in the context of a safety/barring order application. The Judge is deciding if it was likely there was any incident at all and if there is a likelihood of a recurrence. Unless there is a denial that there was any incident at all and there is a blatant lie exposed eg it happened on St patrick day in Cork at a particular time and the person confirms under cross examination that they are absolutely sure it was St Patricks day in cork at that time because it happened an hour after they came home from watching the parade. If photographs and videos are then produced shown the alleged assailant was marching in the parade in Wexford at that time and was in Wexford for several hours afterwards and couldn't possibly have carried out the attack there might be some chance of getting the application thrown out on grounds of a lack of truthfulness.

jumpingjackflash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120450487#Comment_120450487

do you know any? 😅

jumpingjackflash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454637#Comment_120454637

when would times and frequencies matter?

thanks for your replies.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120447422#Comment_120447422

Seriously, stop asking this question. It's irrelevant whether they are perjuring themselves, and if you get hung up on that you will (a) get distracted from things that actually matter to the case, and (b) piss off the court, which does not want to waste time hearing arguments about questions that are not relevant to the issues it has to decide.

Whether somebody has perjured themselves matters when they are tried for perjury. That is not what is happening here. What matters here is whether their account is factual, reliable. You can certainly point to the fact that they have given two inconsistent accounts and use that to suggest that their evidence should not be relied on. Avoid entirely the question of whether the inconsistency is a result of mistake, dishonesty, malice, delusion or whatever. It doesn't matter to the issue before the court, and if you bang on about it you give the impression of someone who is trying to use the proceedings to wreak vengeance on your ex. You want to come across here as the sane, dependent, calm, rational person whose evidence is more reliable than the inconsistent accounts given by your ex.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120463457#Comment_120463457

They might never matter at all. The only time they would matter is in a marginal situation where is judge finds things finely balanced and is in two minds. In that scenario the judge will come down on the side of the party which presents more reasonably. The fact of exaggeration or inconsistency will be only one of may factors which might influence a judge. There was a judge in the District Court some years ago (now retired) who was in the habit of remonstrating with litigants about their clothing! The judge was in the habit of accusing them of not showing respect for the court.

jumpingjackflash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120463665#Comment_120463665

I'm worried about my friend, I get it now regarding perjury and in my own curiosity was confused about all of this. Not really easy to be there for him when I didn't understand. Just have to wait and see what happens.

jumpingjackflash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120465666#Comment_120465666

We'll have to wait and see.

I think I know the judge you are on about..... oh boy! 😉