recovered missing post
June 19, 2009
Sangamon County State’s Attorney John Schmidt — although Burris’ statements were vague, they didn’t support a perjury charge. Maybe not. But from his subsequent revelations, it’s clear he knew what he was doing in not answering. He was asked specific names. Jim Durkin deserves the blame for not making him give an answer to each name.
JOHN SCHMIDT letter to Michael Madigan:
Moreover, an individual does not commit perjury if he corrects the known falsity before the adjournment of the tribunal. This provision accomplishes the legislative intent of the law of perjury which is to get complete and truthful information before the tribunal.
….These were not substantive discussions concerning how to get the appointment, but rather Sen. Burris imploring the listener to tell Gov. Blagojevich he was interested.
…Burris’ responses cannot support a perjury charge. He said he could not recall anyone specific because there were many individuals urging him to run. The answer was
incomplete, but that is not perjury given the form of the questions.
…The two affidavits signed by Senator Burris dated January 5, 2009 and February 4, 2009 are not inconsistent, thus do not support a perjury charge. The January 5, 2009 affidavit only describes the actual appointment process of Governor Blagojevich appointing Roland Burris to the vacant senate seat. It is insufficient to support perjury charges based upon Burris’ testimony before the House Impeachment Committee.
The February 4, 2009 affidavit was requested by the Committee and filed to supplement Burris’ testimony. This affidavit does not support perjury charges based upon Senator Bums’ answers to the House Committee. This affidavit supplements and expands answers while the tribunal was still convened. It should be noted the affidavit was filed with the Special Committee long before Senator Burris knew his conversation with Robert Blagojevich was captured on tape. This fact supports Senator Burris’ claim the affidavit was meant to supplement the record while the tribunal was in sessi
In sum, based upon our review of the facts and the applicable law, there is insufficient evidence to charge Senator Roland Burris with perjury.
SENATOR BURRIS:
I am obviously very pleased with today’s decision by State’s Attorney John Schmidt. His investigation was both thorough and fair, and I am glad that the truth has prevailed. This matter has now been fully investigated; I cooperated at every phase of the process, and as I have said from the beginning, I have never engaged in any pay-to-play, never perjured myself, and came to this seat in an honest and legal way. Today’s announcement confirms all that.
