Perjury cases rising since 2006

Authorities hail antigang law

The number of perjury indictments obtained by the Suffolk District Attorney's Office has risen sharply since 2006, when an antigang law went into effect that eased the requirements for proving that a witness has lied in court.

"The impunity by which gang members were perjuring themselves was insidious," said District Attorney Daniel F. Conley yesterday. "This new law has made our job a bit easier."

Perjury cases stemming from trials for violent crimes were rare in Suffolk County prior to the antigang legislation, signed by then-Governor Mitt Romney. There were only one or two prosecutions annually from 2000 to 2006. But last year, there were four indictments, and this year, through July 23, there have been eight, according to statistics from the Suffolk district attorney's office.

And in Middlesex County, eight people have been indicted on perjury charges so far this year, up from two in 2007.

Authorities are also aggressively pursuing charges against witnesses who mislead police after violent crimes.

Prosecutors across the state say the two-year-old law is an important tool for putting violent criminals behind bars. Prior to 2006, prosecutors were required to prove that a witness's testimony was false, which many in the legal profession equated with retrying the underlying case.

Now prosecutors have only to show that a witness has made two or more sworn declarations that "are inconsistent to the degree that one of them is necessarily false," according to the law. Prosecutors do not have to prove which declaration is false.

Witnesses found guilty of perjury could face up to life in prison, if their testimony is given in a capital case. Last Thursday, Kyrice Grady, a 22-year-old Dorchester man and a key witness in a 2007 homicide case, was arraigned on perjury charges for testifying to a grand jury that he witnessed the crime, then testifying in the subsequent trial that he never saw the killing.

Peter Elikann, a criminal defense attorney and the author of several books on criminal justice policy, said yesterday that the law is well-intentioned but may have a chilling effect on witnesses.

"Now, if you initially didn't tell the truth and wanted to come forward, you can be charged," he said. "Secondly, a number of people will be afraid and reluctant to testify in the first place, because any kind of slip or inconsistency, they can be criminally prosecuted.

"There are so many people who are inexperienced with courts or legal situations and they can get nervous and forget what they said earlier," Elikann said.

But Conley and Middlesex District Attorney Gerald T. Leone said yesterday that they aren't bent on conducting blanket prosecutions for everyone who offers conflicting testimony. Leone said, "If we feel a witness has a legitimate fear, we work with that."

Conley said many witnesses have been threatened with retaliation by gang members and friends or relatives of defendants on trial for violent crimes.

"We tell witnesses who fear for their safety that they have options," he said. "Basically the message is don't subject yourself to a perjury indictment. The witness protection program is there to help them."

In Bristol County, four perjury charges have been sought this year by District Attorney C. Samuel Sutter. It is the highest number since at least 2004, according to statistics provided by his office.

While those cases have risen, authorities are also actively using obstruction-of-justice laws to crack down on misleading information told to police by witnesses.

Gregg Miliote, Sutter's spokesman, said two witnesses to the New Year's Day killing of Edwin Medina at a house party in New Bedford told police they weren't at the party, but a photograph taken at the bash revealed they were.

"There were several people questioned, people running away from the scene including these individuals," Miliote said. The two witnesses were charged with obstruction of justice.

Since Sutter took office in 2007, his office has charged 10 people with obstruction of justice in connection to five different killings. Most of the cases are still open, and bail has ranged from $2,500 to $20,000. In one case, the defendant received a six-month jail sentence and probation, Miliote said.

People should either invoke their right to remain silent, he said, "or give us accurate information."