criminal-law united-kingdom
Lying in Court in the UK
<p>A defendant provable lied in court. We had no right of reply to prove the lies were false. Nothing has been done afterwards. He was found guilty, but received a very light sentence probably based on these lies. Is this normal?</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Is this normal?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Pretty much. </p>

<p>Witnesses lie in court all the time (in my experience, defendants, law enforcement officers and medical doctors are the most likely to lie).</p>

<p>Dealing with a witness who lies in court under oath effectively is one of the most challenging tasks lawyers face. It is an inherently challenging hurdle to proving or defending a case. </p>

<p>The facts as presented in court often differ in some material way from reality. It is a pretty tough thing to accurately measure, but my gut estimate would be that this happens in a least 30%-40% of cases that produce contested trials, although not infrequently, a judge or jury will not find the false testimony to be credible. On the other hand, it isn't at all uncommon (probably at least 10% of the time) for a judge or jury to believe the liars to be telling the truth, and to find the people who are telling the truth to be less credible.</p>

<p>There is absolute immunity from civil liability for lying in court testimony, although it could, in theory, give rise to contempt of court sanctions from the judge in some circumstances, or to a prosecution for perjury. </p>

<p>But, perjury prosecutions are, in practice, very rare, and a good share of them arise from false statements made in documents under oath, rather than from courtroom testimony. There is probably less than 1 perjury prosecution per 1000 provable lies made under oath in courtroom testimony on material issues that end up influencing the outcome in a case.</p>

<p>I totally sympathize with how frustrating this situation is having been there in cases that I am litigating many, many times. But, in short, life isn't fair.</p>
