The part I don't get is: Why does it have to be Not under oath?
Are we saying it's okay if he lies to the investigative body? That seems odd. I don't have a real problem with the testifying in private, though I'd rather have it public. But why can't it be under oath?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2004-04-01 04:33 pm (UTC)Are we saying it's okay if he lies to the investigative body? That seems odd. I don't have a real problem with the testifying in private, though I'd rather have it public. But why can't it be under oath?