Investigation and Perjury

[disillusionedandnaive]

My question involves police conduct in the State of: South Carolina

A complaint was filed for simple assault listing three others present to witness. The investigator in the case took three weeks and applied for a warrant without talking to the witnesses. No effort was made to interview the witnesses and two of the three witnesses I talked to say the complaintant was the one who commited the assault. On the warrant it says the officer appeared duly sworn and then gives the plaintiffs statement. The last line on the warrant says,"The affiant and others are witness to the same."


My question here is since the others were never interviewed did the officer commit perjury by saying others are witness to the same? If the judge had a warrant application that said three witnesses deny the charge would he have still signed it? I also believe this investigator acted with malice toward the person by comments that were made.

[Mr. Knowitall]

My question here is since the others were never interviewed did the officer commit perjury by saying others are witness to the same?

No .

[disillusionedandnaive]

No .

No the warrant would not be issued or no the officer didn"t commit perjury?

[Conrad Hunter]

No chance. The officer did not commit perjury and nobody would do anything about it if he did. He is a lazy probably and that will seriously affect the state's case.

Whoever is injured by this which I assume is anyone charged, needs to have their attorney do depositions with these witnesses before memory fades or is changed by the influence of the state.

Also, no witness for the state will ever be charged with perjury.

[aardvarc]

Exactly. The state is the party who decides which cases get prosecuted, and they are not about to prosecute their own witness in a case. If the information submitted by the officer when seeking the warrant was flawed, inconsistent, hearsay, felacious, or otherwise problematic, the solution is for the defense to move to suppress the evidence gathered via that warrant, which can often be a substantial part of the state's case. If that evidence gets suppressed, that may adequately cripple the state's case against the defendant - maybe even enough for the state to drop it.

And Conrad hit the nail on the head: if no one has bothered to actually talk to the witnesses yet, that needs to happen ASAP.

[disillusionedandnaive]

Thanks. We have an attorney, but he was tied up in a murder trial for two weeks. We are supposed to speak to him today.