In his provocative and hard-hitting new book, James B. Stewart warns of the risks from an epidemic of perjury that has “infected nearly every aspect of society.” Citing prosecutors who speak of a recent surge of concerted, deliberate lying by sophisticated, educated, affluent individuals, often represented by the best lawyers, he focuses on four cases involving well-known people at the pinnacle of their fields: business executive and lifestyle guru Martha Stewart, convicted of lying to investigators about the reasons her ImClone stock was sold; former Dick Cheney adviser Lewis “Scooter” Libby, found guilty of perjury in connection with the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity; home-run king Barry Bonds, indicted for perjury related to illegal use of steroid drugs; and Bernard Madoff, who, while conducting the greatest Ponzi scheme in history and lying to investors and investigators alike, was never actually indicted for perjury.
As in earlier books such as “Blood Sport” and “Den of Thieves,” Stewart offers riveting accounts of the unfolding of each drama. He brings to bear his superb skills as an investigative reporter, interviewing the main participants in the four cases, and acquiring previously secret grand jury transcripts and notes by FBI agents and other investigators through Freedom of Information Act requests.
‘Tangled Webs: How False Statements are Undermining America: From Martha Stewart to Bernie Madoff’ by James B. Stewart (Penguin Press. 473 pp. $29.95)
Using such documents, along with excerpts from his extensive interviews, journal entries and other materials, Stewart aims to pinpoint the very moment when participants decided whether to “practice to deceive” under oath. For some, to be sure,Madoff chief among them, locating such a long-past moment might be impossible. But many of those found guilty of perjury or false statements in the four cases might at first have rejected out of hand the possibility that they would ever commit perjury, only to arrive at a time when they chose to do just that.
The author’s analysis of the choices made by those who became entangled in the Martha Stewart case is especially interesting on this score. He offers at times minute-by-minute documentation of how Merrill Lynch stockbroker Peter Bacanovic came to give first one account of how Stewart’s ImClone stocks were sold, then another; and of how Stewart’s testimony came to agree with his second account. At the same time, we see the struggle that Bacanovic’s assistant Douglas Faneuil went through, first concealing crucial evidence regarding the stock transaction, then recognizing that he could not bring himself to give false testimony under oath. Faneuil, the author points out, is the only one in his book, among all those shown to have lied, to have come forward with the truth “for no other reason than that his conscience demanded it.”
Why should so many risk so much by lying under oath, a felony punishable by prison? James Stewart considers explanations such as loyalty, manipulative character traits, and the support of enablers with much to gain from deceit on the part of their clients and friends. But ultimately, he suggests, the reason “seems only too obvious: they thought they could get away with it.”
This commenter is a Washington Post contributor. Post contributors aren’t staff, but may write articles or columns. In some cases, contributors are sources or experts quoted in a story.
Comments our editors find particularly useful or relevant are displayed in Top Comments, as are comments by users with these badges: . Replies to those posts appear here, as well as posts by staff writers.
To pause and restart automatic updates, click "Live" or "Paused". If paused, you'll be notified of the number of additional comments that have come in.
Comments our editors find particularly useful or relevant are displayed in Top Comments, as are comments by users with these badges: . Replies to those posts appear here, as well as posts by staff writers.
.JPG)
Loading...
Comments