Laserfiche WebLink
four different people depending on whatever their mood is. <br /> This would assist us in gaining knowledge in one particular <br /> thing prior to court. <br /> MR. SCHUTTE: Mr. Ono, you mentioned about <br /> being able to tie down one particular witness to the truth <br /> . . .but this doesn °t really recessarily nail him down to <br /> having told the truth under subpoena. What I am referring <br /> tois this. . .there are situations that exist, today, in very <br /> recent court proceedings where a witness testified under <br /> oath, under immunity, in a particular crime and completely <br /> changed his testimony and was resolved of this with nothing <br /> else. It bothers me because I can ' t picture the two things , <br /> --your mentioning this having a person tied down by oath and <br /> today what it means is not necessarily the oath that he takes <br /> but how smart he is to move around that. . .because the oath <br /> has nothing to do with the situation so you are contradicting <br /> the situation that exists today. <br /> MR. ONO: No, I don ' t think I 'm contradicting <br /> it. I think the system contradicts itself. <br /> MR. SCHUTTE: Then what you are saying is <br /> that this is not really as foolproof as you want it to be. <br /> MR. ONO: No, if there was a possibility to <br /> hook a person up to a light and every time he told the truth <br /> he would light up and every time he didn ' t tell the truth he <br /> wouldn ' t light up it would be perfect for us. I know what <br /> you are talking about. I know which case you are talking about. <br /> The solution may seem simplistic and I think it is but for many <br /> witnesses just the simple fact of raising their hand and saying , <br /> "I swear I will be telling the truth" and then sort ofL like"' :an: :;. <br /> official proceeding. . .it ' s a little different from them just <br /> talking to an investigator and the investigator asking him what <br /> happened. The guy is under no compulsion to tell the truth. <br /> This will not weed out your chronic liars. This will not weed <br /> out the person that wants to lie and is going to lie anyway. <br /> But it will weed out some of those people. The other thing is <br /> that by putting the person under the oath in this sense and <br /> compelling him to testify to one particular story, now if he <br /> goes into court we would have something a little more substantial <br /> to present to the court or to show the jury. So if he comes into <br /> our office and says that Joe Blow killed Richard Roe and then <br /> goes into court and says , "Well , I lied to the Prosecutor, I <br /> didn ' t see Joe Blow kill Richard Roe, it was somebody else" , it co 2//3 <br /> would completely destroy our case in many cases. With this <br /> (70dt•ional] thing in here we can also bring up the fact to him, <br /> "Hey, didn ' t you swear that this was true and didn ' t you take an <br /> oath, a solemn oath that this was what you saw" . It also opens <br /> up the avenue, right away, of criminal proceedings for false <br /> swearing in official matters. So that the person could be dealt <br /> with immediately just upon the difference in statements. <br /> MR. SCHUTTE: Mr. Ono, I can appreciate your <br /> position and imagine it can be very frustrating if you have a <br /> situations like this if you have to protect the. . .sometimes it <br /> seems like the laws are made to protect the criminal and not <br /> -14- <br />