Federal Appeals Court Addresses `Literal Truth’ Defense to Perjury

A perjury defendant’s presentation of a plausible understanding of the circumstances that would make the statements at issue “literally true” is not enough to establish an absolute defense under Bronston v. United States, 409 U.S. 352 (1973), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit made clear July 22. The literal-truth defense does not apply when the government contests the defendant’s assertions with its own reasonable understanding of the circumstances that would render the statements knowingly false, the court stressed. (United States v. Thomas)

In Bronston, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a perjury conviction based on the ...