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
The above statute provides for a fine and/or up to five years in prison as punishment. Within federal jurisdiction, statements made in two broad categories of judicial proceedings may qualify as perjurious: Federal official proceedings, and Federal Court or Grand Jury proceedings. A third type of perjury entails the procurement of perjurious statements from another person.More generally, the statement must occur in the "course of justice," but this definition leaves room open for interpretation..One particularly precarious aspect of this phrasing is that it entails knowledge of the accused person’s perception of the truthful nature of events and not necessarily the actual truth of those events. It is important to note the distinction here, between giving a false statement under oath and merely misstating a fact accidentally, though this distinction can be especially difficult to discern in court of law.
Little if any evidence of a struggle.? So are we to believe its a normal thing to have this mess on the counter.and for a plate of food to be left in such a way it could fall
one paper bag containing stained carton of marlboro lights.
one paper bag containing one metal cap.
one paper bag containing hand rolled cigarette.
All these items were sent to serology for testing. 2-11 on the list were also sent for finger prints. The results were with held
Trash can there's a wrapper from an ice cream cone. Finger prints were never taken for evidence. Why?
10 prints found on the ice cream box all of them are UNDENTIFIED ...Ice cream wrapper on trash can NEVER tested for PRINTS. ...
Notice the description Maxwell gave?Beard, Ball Cap? Maxwell gave?Beard, Ball Cap?
5'10 or taller
The Passenger identified as having light to blondish brown hair.
Eating an ice cream cone.He stated " I got a very good look at them"
He identified #3 which was not Harvey Windsor Who by the way is 5'6 and has dark Brown to near black hair. There were no prints of Windsor s in the station or in the car .
As you can see in this picture of Windsor "he was not identified by witness
Fishers Sann Ann location South of Honey Comb Hwy 431
Harvey Windsor was here at 1:30 pm on February 25 1988
He was seen making a purchase of Gas,oil,and snacks on Credit
He left travelling North driving a Dark Blue 1976 Plymouth Swinger
Maxwell at Colon lavon Guthrie trial For The murder of Randal Pepper,Michael Maxwell Identified Guthrie as the one inside witness Michael the store,(wearing baseball cap,dark brown or black hair, 5'10" or maybe taller)The one sitting in the passenger side of the car with the door open had Light brown to Blondish brown hair...was Alabama tag all he saw was BY
<
No comments:
Post a Comment