Probably not. You’re allowed to lie in “general” speech (not a legal term). If he had made one statement under oath, and a mutually exclusive statement, also under oath, then one of those statements would be perjury.
But an outburst in court can be considered contempt. The judge could have marched him back in for that one but it probably would have been seen as petty.
I’m surprised the judge didn’t yank him back on that statement as proof that he lied to the court and give him a longer term
He’d need to be tried again for purgory which he very well might be
I don’t think he was under oath at the time he made that statement, so perjury is not a concern.
That’s not how it works. His statement out of court can be used as evidence that his statements in court were false (perjury).
Probably not. You’re allowed to lie in “general” speech (not a legal term). If he had made one statement under oath, and a mutually exclusive statement, also under oath, then one of those statements would be perjury.
So he didn’t commit pierogi
Was he pragante?
Unless he was in Prague.
I love Perogies!
But an outburst in court can be considered contempt. The judge could have marched him back in for that one but it probably would have been seen as petty.
Lol purgatory might be in his future anyway
I read that as purgatory at first and got a little confused
I doubt it’d be worth it to pursue. He could always argue he was changed at the time he said it but in between then and now, he changed his mind back.