United States District Court, S. D. New York.

Summary

United States District Court, S. D. New York. U.S. v. Sun Myung Moon 532 F.Supp… (1982)

Moon's argument that the IRS could not possibly have been misled is based on the erroneous premise that materiality is determined by evaluating the actual effect of the statement on IRS operations. This rationale, if carried to its logical conclusion, would preclude prosecution for a misstatement on a tax return, even if motivated by a desire to avoid taxes illegally, as long as an investigation would have revealed the truth. Such a result would be preposterous. Consequently, it is the potential, not actual, effects that control the issue of materiality.
Source: Wikisource

United States District Court, S. D. New York. U.S. v. Sun Myung Moon 532 F.Supp… (1982)

There is no question that if a witness testifies falsely in a proceeding in the district court, a grand jury can issue a perjury indictment even though it did not have an opportunity to observe his demeanor on the witness stand. [FN14] Similarly, if a prosecutor does not discover that a grand jury witness committed perjury until after the grand jury before whom the witness testified has been disbanded, there is no question that another grand jury can indict the witness for perjury.
Source: Wikisource

United States District Court, S. D. New York. U.S. v. Sun Myung Moon 532 F.Supp… (1982)

Government has no threshold obligation, before seeking a perjury indictment, to take reasonable steps to insure that an erroneous answer by a witness is in fact an intentional lie and not merely a mistake or product of faulty memory; and (4) questions and answers relating to defendant's ownership of certain stock and relating to bank accounts in that defendant's name could not be deemed immaterial to grand jury's investigation into whether the defendants had violated federal tax law.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature