Monday, 29 November 2010

Mr. Steadson's unqualified interpretation of the law of perjury is a lie


It's difficult to believe that the 'Amway' Lord Haw Haw, Mr.'IBOFB,' Steadson, is not blind drunk when he composes the unsolicited, reality-inverting bullshit which he regularly dumps your Blog. So far, his only explanation of why Robert FitzPatrick has not been charged with pejury for making what Mr. Steadson claims to have been a false declaration to the California court hearing the Pokorny RICO lawsuit against 'Amway' ( ) has been: that Robert FitzPatrick was not lying to the court and, therefore, not committing perjury, because he believed his false statement to be true.

As you know, perjury is the willful act of swearing a false oathor affirmation to tell the truth (whether spoken or in writing) concerning matters material to a judicial proceeding (i.e. a witness falsely promises to tell the truth about matters which effect the outcome of the case). Perjury is considered a serious offence as it can be used to usurp the power of the courts, resulting in miscarriages of justice. In the USA, the general perjury statute under Federal law defines perjury as a felony and provides for a prison sentence of up to five years. In the UK, a potential penalty for perjury is a prison sentence of up to 7 years. The rules for perjury also apply when a person has made a statement under penalty of perjury, even if the person has not been sworn or affirmed as a witness before an appropriate official. Statements of interpretation of simple fact are not perjury because people often make inaccurate statements unwittingly and not deliberately. Individuals may have honest, but mistaken, beliefs about certain simple facts, or their recollection may be inaccurate. Like most other crimes in the common law system, to be convicted of perjury one must have had the intention to commit the act, and to have actually committed the act, of lying in order to effect the outcome of a judicial proceeding. Subornation of perjury, or attempting to induce another person to perjure themselves, is itself a crime.

Mr. Steadson's simplistic interpretation of the law of perjury in respect of Robert FitzPatrick's declaration in the Pokorny RICO lawsuit is, therefore, a demonstrable lie; for Robert FitzPatrick is not just a simple witness whom Mr. Steadson has accused of unwittingly making an innaccurate statement of simple fact to a court. In reality, this expert witness gave a long and detailed explanation to a court of what qualifies him as a expert witness and of why 'Amway's' so-called 'Multilevel Marketing Business Opportunity' (which, during the previous 50+ years, has had no significant or sustainable source of revenue other than its own victims) is, in his expert opinion, fundamentally fraudulent. Given the intentional, extensive and detailed nature of his declaration, and the fact that he has delivered essentially the same declaration in more than a dozen State and federal prosecutions concerning so-called 'Multilevel Marketing' companies, it would be impossible for Robert Fitzpatrick to be simply mistaken.

Self-evidently, Mr. Steadson has, on behalf of the billionaire bosses of the 'Amway' mob, been trying to weasel his way out of possibly being sued for libel for making a false (albeit indirect) accusation of perjury against Robert FitzPatrick.

David Brear (copyright 2010)


IBOFB said...

That's pretty funny. You are aware that the court actually rejected FitzPatrick's affidavit, dismissing it as being from a "purported expert"?

So-called "expert witnesses" are wrong in their testimony all the time, doesn't mean they committed perjury.

Mind you, I just reread his affidavit, and I don't think he said anything that was actually wrong. Saying that, in his opinion (or "I characterize"), something is so would only be wrong if it wasn't his opinion.

Well ... one minor thing I think he got wrong, he states that the "endless chain business model", ie recruiting consumers, is what results in 70% of IBOs not renewing. I don't think that's the major contributing factor to that statistic.

IBOFB said...

I should add, the affidavit was rejected in the initial stages of the case when discussing whether arbitration applied or not. I've no idea if it was accepted later in the case. Most of the affidavit is FitzPatrick waffling on about himself.

rocket said...

What's really funny is IBOFB trying to tell others about truth & honesty when he seemingly possesses neither.

Nice one Steadson. So tell me, have you actually signed on with Amway to be their official spokesperson?

Thanks for not beating the dead horse you were trying to ride, AKA the retail sales rule. Another testament to your "truth"

You don't slink away gracefully, but you do eventually slink away.....

Joecool said...

Yep, IBO FB likes the drive by shooting style. Comes in and makes questionable claims and statements and then disappears.