Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (176017)	8/30/2001 11:06:27 AM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

For your lawyerly continuing education - The Clinton Rule: Thursday, Aug. 30, 2001 10:02 a.m. EDT Condit Shocker: DA Says 'Clinton Rule' Lets Him Off the Hook In a bizarre series of comments Wednesday, Stanislaus County District Attorney James Brazelton cited "the Clinton rule" to explain that embattled congressman Gary Condit broke no laws when he tried to get a California flight attendant to sign a false affidavit denying their affair. "There's an exception to all laws regarding perjury, false swearing, witness tampering and obstruction," Brazelton told CNN's "Burden of Proof" host Greta Van Susteren. "That exception, known as the Clinton rule, says that you cannot be prosecuted for any of these crimes if the subject matter being lied about is sex." "There's no law against having sex with somebody," Brazelton added. The California prosecutor was responding to a court filing by James Robinson, attorney for flight attendant Anne Marie Smith, who alleges that Condit repeatedly called her in May to coax her into signing a false affidavit denying their affair. On Monday, Robinson, working with longtime California prosecutor Sterling Norris, now with Judicial Watch, presented evidence to Brazelton that Condit had engaged in witness tampering and obstruction of justice. Yesterday, D.A. Brazelton, Robinson and Norris were guests on the CNN show, where they locked horns over whether Condit had broken any laws. BRAZELTON: Well, I again reviewed the documents. And I, frankly, feel that there are no criminal charges alleged. And let me, first of all, indicate to you that I am not interested in protecting Congressman Condit or anybody else involved in this. I'm interested in seeing to it that the truth comes out. The documents that were presented to me are requesting a grand jury indictment for obstruction of justice. First of all, there's no California statute regarding obstruction of justice. That's a federal statute. I believe that the ... VAN SUSTEREN: Well, let me ask Jim Robinson. Let me stop right there, and let's take it one by one. Jim Robinson, the DA says no California statute obstruction of justice, no crime. What do you say? ROBINSON: I toss that to Sterling. He's the California attorney. And that's why I went to him. VAN SUSTEREN: No, he said - but this is a federal - and they're saying that this is a federal matter. ROBINSON: We are saying that this is California statute; this is California law. There is California statute on suborning perjury. There is a California statute on obstructing justice. VAN SUSTEREN: OK, Sterling, what do you say in response to Jim Brazelton? NORRIS: Mr. Brazelton is absolutely wrong. Try 182.5 of the penal code. VAN SUSTEREN: All right. NORRIS: Conspiracy to obstruct justice. It's been there since 1872, a subordination of perjury, section 127 in the penal code. That's there. They're all ... VAN SUSTEREN: OK. Jim Brazelton, you've heard Sterling. Sterling says there is a crime there. How do you respond to that? BRAZELTON: The crime he is citing is conspiracy. And there are certain things you have to show to prove a conspiracy. One of them - the only overt act that is alleged that took place in this county is a person asking Anne Marie to make a telephone call. There's certainly no law against that. There's no law against having sex with somebody. And about four years ago, what was known - or is known - as Condit's rule was enacted. And it says that there's an exception to all laws regarding perjury, false swearing, witness tampering and obstruction. That exception, known as the Clinton rule, says that you cannot be prosecuted for any of these crimes if the subject matter being lied about is sex. (End of Excerpt) After the program, Robinson said he was outraged over Brazelton's attempts to use the Clinton "just about sex" rule to excuse possible Condit criminality. "This is not about sex," he told the Modesto Bee. "This is about obstructing the investigation into the disappearance of Chandra Levy." Robinson also complained that the Stanislaus County DA hadn't had enough time to conduct any type of meaningful investigation since the charges were filed on Monday. newsmax.com