Dershowitz: ‘Plausible’ that Willis and Wade Have ‘Committed Perjury’

RUSH TRANSCRIPT:
>> Sean: it would be need to be, in my view, professor, a new venue, again, unqualified, overpaid, lead attorney, paying — being paid exoribant amount of money. I believe this case need to be dropped and I’ll take it a step further. What happens to all the people that made plea deals? A lot of people make plea deals not because they are guilty, because it takes the possibility of jail off the table and removes that pressure. Would you agree with that characterization?
>> I certainly would. And the people who pled guilty will probably seek to undue their pleas unless they are satisfied with the result. For me the issue is perjury. There is a plausible case, not an ironclad case, a plausible case that the two of them both committed perjury. He seems clearly to have committed perjury, if not in the courtroom in answering his interrogatories where he swore under oath essentially that he did not have sex between the time he was married and the date he signed that, admitting, however, that he did have sex when he thought the marriage was broken down. That’s one thing. The second thing is, this is a she said, they said confrontation. We have a witness who seems completely plausible, who said that she admitted that she had a relationship with him during the period of time when she denied doing it. One witness against two witnesses, but remember, she testified under oath, hey, all you need for proof is one witness’ testimony. There was one witness, her friend, who testified that there was sex during the period of time that they denied it. So I think there is a plausible case for perjury here but I think there is an open and check case for disqualification based on the appearance of impropriety. Look, when you admit that you paid for all these trips on your credit cards, then the burden of proof shifts to the other side to demonstrate that there was payback in cash and the fact that there are no records and the payments all have records, but the repayments have no records, gives rise to a plausible interpretation that that’s not true. That there was financial benefit that accrued to the district attorney. Therefore, there is more than enough for the judge to say at least an appearance of impropriety, total disqualification of the office, start from scratch, put the case in a different district, let’s see if an independent prosecutor thinks there is enough here for a rico prosecution.