Cases in the News
nav buttons


The President on Trial: Sifting Through the Evidence

           Clinton in crisis Whitewater Full Coverage

Search Clinton in Crisis

Whitewater The Trial
Trial Guide
Evidence Guide
Transcripts
Video
Discuss the Trial
Clinton in crisis Whitewater The Starr Report and Rebuttals
Clinton in crisis Whitewater Video Index
Clinton in crisis Documents Documents
Starr Investigation
Jones v. Clinton
Whitewater
Clinton in crisis Jones v. Clinton Jones v. Clinton
Clinton in crisis Whitewater Whitewater

Article II, Charge 7: An Influential Man (Pt. II)

(7) On or about January 21, 23 and 26, 1998, William Jefferson Clinton made false and misleading statements to potential witnesses in a Federal grand jury proceeding in order to corruptly influence the testimony of those witnesses. The false and misleading statements made by the William Jefferson Clinton were repeated by the witnesses to the grand jury, causing the grand jury to receive false and misleading information.

If the testimony of Clinton's aides is to be believed (and it is the same evidence crucial to the last part of Article I), the president told them things about his dalliances with Lewinsky that were misleading at best and outright false at worst.

In late November, months after the Starr report was released, he told the House Judiciary committee, "I did not want my family, friends, or colleagues to know the full nature of my relationship with Ms. Lewinsky." But did he, as the article alleges, want his colleagues to hear falsehoods he hoped they would repeat to investigators?

House Democrats defended Clinton's actions, insisting that because he denied the Lewinsky affair publicly, it would have been consistent to also deny it to his staff.

So is it obstruction? The charge here is similar to the allegation he tried to influence Betty Currie's testimony. Once again, Clinton's possible guilt lies in his intent.

Again, senators could seek additional evidence of Clinton's motives. The duty of Clinton's aides to defend him may become a salient issue, and they may be asked to give more detail about the conversations and their take on the president's motives. (While this might be considered hearsay in a courtroom, it would likely be admissible during the Senate trial.)


Introduction
Article I
Charges 1 & 2: What is Sex? | Charge 3: Speak No Evil, Hear No Evil? | Charge 4: A Man of Influence? | In Sum...A Man of Honor?
Article II
Charges 1 & 2: Greasing the Wheels? | Charge 3: The Trail of the Gift Horse | Charge 4: Escape to New York | Charge 5: Speak No Evil, Hear No Evil? (Part II) | Charge 6: The Four Questions | Charge 7: An Influential Man (Pt. II) | In Sum...All or Nothing?
Version for Printing


HOMEPAGE | VERDICTS | FAMOUS CASES | TRIAL TRACKING | LEGAL DOCUMENTS | PROGRAM GUIDE | CTTV STORE | GAMES/CONTEST | LEGAL TERMS | SEARCH | INDEX | HOW TO GET CTTV | COMMENTS



Copyright© 1999 by the Courtroom Television Network LLC. All rights reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced in any form without permission of Court TV.Nothing in this site is intended to constitute legal advice. COURT TV is a registered trademark and COURT TV ONLINE is a service mark of the Courtroom Television Network.