<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pershing Park Case: Now It&#8217;s All About The Cover Up; Nickles Faces Huge Test In U.S. District Court</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/</link>
	<description>68.3 Square Miles of D.C. News and Opinion</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:41:41 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pershing Park Case: Plaintiffs File Response To Sporkin Report - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-695922</link>
		<dc:creator>Pershing Park Case: Plaintiffs File Response To Sporkin Report - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 23:25:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-695922</guid>
		<description>[...] to the Sporkin findings [PDF]---repeating their position that a federal criminal investigation into the missing or destroyed evidence should be on the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to the Sporkin findings [PDF]---repeating their position that a federal criminal investigation into the missing or destroyed evidence should be on the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pershing Park Case: Council Hearings Unlikely - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-683505</link>
		<dc:creator>Pershing Park Case: Council Hearings Unlikely - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:50:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-683505</guid>
		<description>[...] late July, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan called for an investigation into the discovery abuses in the Pershing Park case. Sullivan suggested that the D.C. Council [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] late July, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan called for an investigation into the discovery abuses in the Pershing Park case. Sullivan suggested that the D.C. Council [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pershing Park Case: Mendelson Cites More False Statements From Nickles - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-647836</link>
		<dc:creator>Pershing Park Case: Mendelson Cites More False Statements From Nickles - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 22:10:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-647836</guid>
		<description>[...] Today, At-Large Councilmember Phil Mendelson joined former Councilmember Kathy Patterson in fact-checking AG Peter Nickles&#8216; increasingly falty sworn statement regarding the troubled Pershing Park case. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Today, At-Large Councilmember Phil Mendelson joined former Councilmember Kathy Patterson in fact-checking AG Peter Nickles&#8216; increasingly falty sworn statement regarding the troubled Pershing Park case. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kathy Patterson Factchecks AG Nickles Over Pershing Park Case - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-647530</link>
		<dc:creator>Kathy Patterson Factchecks AG Nickles Over Pershing Park Case - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:12:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-647530</guid>
		<description>[...] Today, former Councilmember Kathy Patterson submitted a letter to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan regarding the troubled Pershing Park Case. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Today, former Councilmember Kathy Patterson submitted a letter to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan regarding the troubled Pershing Park Case. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pershing Park Case Attorney Tom Koger Explains Himself - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-644583</link>
		<dc:creator>Pershing Park Case Attorney Tom Koger Explains Himself - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 21:30:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-644583</guid>
		<description>[...] Nickles has submitted his sworn statement to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan regarding the missing evidence and discovery problems in a Pershing Park [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Nickles has submitted his sworn statement to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan regarding the missing evidence and discovery problems in a Pershing Park [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Breaking: AG Nickles Submits Statement In Pershing Park Case - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-644573</link>
		<dc:creator>Breaking: AG Nickles Submits Statement In Pershing Park Case - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:19:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-644573</guid>
		<description>[...] Nickles has submitted his sworn statement to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan addressing the evidentiary problems in a Pershing Park case. Along with his statement, are the statements of other District lawyers [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Nickles has submitted his sworn statement to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan addressing the evidentiary problems in a Pershing Park case. Along with his statement, are the statements of other District lawyers [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Pershing Park Case: Judge Sporkin Starting To Get Involved, Praises AG Nickles - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-644208</link>
		<dc:creator>The Pershing Park Case: Judge Sporkin Starting To Get Involved, Praises AG Nickles - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 19:17:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-644208</guid>
		<description>[...] submit a sworn statement to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan. The statement must address issues concerning the lengthy discovery process and missing evidence in a Pershing Park case. We highlighted certain documents and testimonies concerning the missing [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] submit a sworn statement to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan. The statement must address issues concerning the lengthy discovery process and missing evidence in a Pershing Park case. We highlighted certain documents and testimonies concerning the missing [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Pershing Park Case: D.C. Police Department Lawyer Contradicts Officer&#8217;s Deposition - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-643971</link>
		<dc:creator>The Pershing Park Case: D.C. Police Department Lawyer Contradicts Officer&#8217;s Deposition - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 19:47:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-643971</guid>
		<description>[...] has been ordered by a U.S. District Court judge to submit a sworn statement on Wednesday explaining all the problems in a Pershing Park case. Last week, we reported on two documents he may want to explain: the false [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] has been ordered by a U.S. District Court judge to submit a sworn statement on Wednesday explaining all the problems in a Pershing Park case. Last week, we reported on two documents he may want to explain: the false [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pershing Park: Another Piece Of Evidence Goes Missing; One Cop Speaks Out - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-643069</link>
		<dc:creator>Pershing Park: Another Piece Of Evidence Goes Missing; One Cop Speaks Out - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 19:30:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-643069</guid>
		<description>[...] Peter Nickles must submit to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan a sworn statement explaining his office&#8217;s actions in a troubling Pershing Park case. He may want to consider the subject of this false affidavit concerning the mysterious gaps in the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Peter Nickles must submit to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan a sworn statement explaining his office&#8217;s actions in a troubling Pershing Park case. He may want to consider the subject of this false affidavit concerning the mysterious gaps in the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Councilmember Alexander Raises Concerns Over AG Nickles - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-642872</link>
		<dc:creator>Councilmember Alexander Raises Concerns Over AG Nickles - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:23:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-642872</guid>
		<description>[...] has come under fire recently for his office&#8217;s conduct in a Pershing Park civil suit. District evidence has either been destroyed or lost and discovery continues to be a problem in that .... The discovery process has dragged on for years. The U.S. District Court judge in the case slammed [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] has come under fire recently for his office&#8217;s conduct in a Pershing Park civil suit. District evidence has either been destroyed or lost and discovery continues to be a problem in that .... The discovery process has dragged on for years. The U.S. District Court judge in the case slammed [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack Evans Says He Still Supports Peter Nickles - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-642777</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack Evans Says He Still Supports Peter Nickles - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 15:23:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-642777</guid>
		<description>[...] by controversial AG Peter Nickles. Last week, a U.S. District Court judge strongly condemned the OAG&#8217;s conduct surrounding a Pershing Park civil suit in which discovery has taken at least five years, and crucial evidence has gone missing or been [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] by controversial AG Peter Nickles. Last week, a U.S. District Court judge strongly condemned the OAG&#8217;s conduct surrounding a Pershing Park civil suit in which discovery has taken at least five years, and crucial evidence has gone missing or been [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SaveDC</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-642330</link>
		<dc:creator>SaveDC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:59:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-642330</guid>
		<description>Please put the lower level DC police and Unified Communications employees under oath by DC City Council hearings or Federal Grand Jury. A DC GOVERNMENT employee or employees intentionally erased the tapes. By D.C Code statutes that’s a criminal offense.

22-2402. Perjury
a) A person commits the offense of perjury if:

(1) Having taken an oath or affirmation before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in a case in which the law authorized such oath or affirmation to be administered, that he or she will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by that person subscribed is true, wilfully and contrary to an oath or affirmation states or subscribes any material matter which he or she does not believe to be true and which in fact is not true; or 

(2) As a notary public or other officer authorized to take proof of certification, wilfully certifies falsely that an instrument was acknowledged by any party thereto or wilfully certifies falsely as to another material matter in an acknowledgement. 

(b) Any person convicted of perjury shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.

22-2404. False swearing
(a) A person commits the offense of false swearing if under oath or affirmation he or she wilfully makes a false statement, in writing, that is in fact material and the statement is one which is required by law to be sworn or affirmed before a notary public or other person authorized to administer oaths.

b) Any person convicted of false swearing shall be fined not more than $2,500 or imprisoned for not more than 3 years, or both.

22-2405. False statements
(a) A person commits the offense of making false statements if that person wilfully makes a false statement that is in fact material, in writing, directly or indirectly, to any instrumentality of the District of Columbia government, under circumstances in which the statement could reasonably be expected to be relied upon as true; provided, that the writing indicates that the making of a false statement is punishable by criminal penalties.

(b) Any person convicted of making false statements shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than 180 days, or both.

22-1805a. Conspiracy to commit crime.
(a) If 2 or more persons conspire either to commit a criminal offense or to defraud the District of Columbia or any court or agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, each shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, except that if the object of the conspiracy is a criminal offense punishable by less than 5 years, the maximum penalty for the conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum penalty provided for that offense.

(b) No person may be convicted of conspiracy unless an overt act is alleged and proved to have been committed by 1 of the conspirators pursuant to the conspiracy and to effect its purpose.

(c) When the object of a conspiracy contrived within the District of Columbia is to engage in conduct in a jurisdiction outside the District of Columbia which would constitute a criminal offense under an act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia if performed therein, the conspiracy is a violation of this section if:

(1) Such conduct would also constitute a crime under the laws of the other jurisdiction if performed therein; or 

(2) Such conduct would constitute a criminal offense under an act of Congress exclusively applicable to the District of Columbia even if performed outside the District of Columbia. 

(d) A conspiracy contrived in another jurisdiction to engage in conduct within the District of Columbia which would constitute a criminal offense under an act of Congress exclusively applicable to the District of Columbia if performed within the District of Columbia is a violation of this section when an overt act pursuant to the conspiracy is committed within the District of Columbia. Under such circumstances, it is immaterial and no defense to a prosecution for conspiracy that the conduct which is the object of the conspiracy would not constitute a crime under the laws of the other jurisdiction.

22-2403 Subornation of perjury
A person commits the offense of subornation of perjury if that person wilfully procures another to commit perjury. Any person convicted of subornation of perjury shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.

22-704. Corrupt influence; officials. 

(a) Whosoever corruptly, directly or indirectly, gives any money, or other bribe, present, reward, promise, contract, obligation, or security for the payment of any money, present, reward, or thing of value to any ministerial, administrative, executive, or judicial officer of the District of Columbia, or any employee, or other person acting in any capacity for the District of Columbia, or any agency thereof, either before or after the officer, employee, or other person acting in any capacity for the District of Columbia is qualified, with intent to influence such official’s action on any matter which is then pending, or may by law come or be brought before such official in such official’s official capacity, or to cause such official to execute any of the powers in such official vested, or to perform any duties of such official required, with partiality or favor, or otherwise than is required by law, or in consideration that such official being authorized in the line of such official’s duty to contract for any advertising or for the furnishing of any labor or material, shall directly or indirectly arrange to receive or shall receive, or shall withhold from the parties so contracted with, any portion of the contract price, whether that price be fixed by law or by agreement, or in consideration that such official has nominated or appointed any person to any office or exercised any power in such official vested, or performed any duty of such official required, with partiality or favor, or otherwise contrary to law; and whosoever, being such an official, shall receive any such money, bribe, present, or reward, promise, contract, obligation, or security, with intent or for the purpose or consideration aforesaid shall be deemed guilty of bribery and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by imprisonment for a term not less than 6 months nor more than 5 years.

(b) Whosoever corrupts or attempts, directly or indirectly, to corrupt any special master, auditor, juror, arbitrator, umpire, or referee, by giving, offering, or promising any gift or gratuity whatever, with intent to bias the opinion, or influence the decision of such official, in relation to any matter pending in the court, or before an inquest, or for the decision of which such arbitrator, umpire, or referee has been chosen or appointed, and every official who receives, or offers or agrees to receive, a bribe in any of the cases above mentioned shall be guilty of bribery and upon conviction thereof shall be punished as hereinbefore provided.
22-722. Prohibited acts; penalty. 

(a) A person commits the offense of obstruction of justice if that person:

(1) Knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, threatens or corruptly persuades another person, or by threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede a juror in the discharge of the juror’s official duties; 

(2) Knowingly uses intimidating or physical force, threatens or corruptly persuades another person, or by threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede a witness or officer in any official proceeding, with intent to: 

(A) Influence, delay, or prevent the truthful testimony of the person in an official proceeding; 

(B) Cause or induce the person to withhold truthful testimony or a record, document, or other object from an official proceeding; 

(C) Evade a legal process that summons the person to appear as a witness or produce a document in an official proceeding; or 

(D) Cause or induce the person to be absent from a legal official proceeding to which the person has been summoned by legal process; 

(3) Harasses another person with the intent to hinder, delay, prevent, or dissuade the person from: 

(A) Attending or testifying truthfully in an official proceeding; 

(B) Reporting to a law enforcement officer the commission of, or any information concerning, a criminal offense; 

(C) Arresting or seeking the arrest of another person in connection with the commission of a criminal offense; or 

(D) Causing a criminal prosecution or a parole or probation revocation proceeding to be sought or instituted, or assisting in a prosecution or other official proceeding; 

(4) Injures any person or his or her property on account of the person or any other person giving to a criminal investigator in the course of any criminal investigation information related to a violation of any criminal statute in effect in the District of Columbia; 

(5) Injures any person or his or her property on account of the person or any other person performing his official duty as a juror, witness, or officer in any court in the District of Columbia; or 

(6) Corruptly, or by threats of force, any way obstructs or impedes or endeavors to obstruct or impede the due administration of justice in any official proceeding. 

(b) Any person convicted of obstruction of justice shall be sentenced to a maximum period of incarceration of not less than 3 years and not more than 30 years, or shall be fined not more than $10,000, or both. For purposes of imprisonment following revocation of release authorized by § 24-403.01, obstruction of justice is a Class A felony.

22-723. Tampering with physical evidence; penalty.
(a) A person commits the offense of tampering with physical evidence if, knowing or having reason to believe an official proceeding has begun or knowing that an official proceeding is likely to be instituted, that person alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, or removes a record, document, or other object, with intent to impair its integrity or its availability for use in the official proceeding.

(b) Any person convicted of tampering with physical evidence shall be fined not more than $5,000, imprisoned for not more than 3 years, or both.

It’s time to hold DC GOVERMENT employees accountable. This multi-million dollar PershingGATE alleged crimes created by “Ramsey, Lanier and Newsham, LLP ” must be investigated criminally to result in indictments and guilty pleas.

Plus, disbarments for AG’s office and MPD General Counsel’s Office attorneys.

The Honorable Councilmembers Cheh and Mendelson please investigate immediately the corruption that occurred with PershingGATE. Please do not allow the DC GOVERNMENT employees involved in this massive cover-up to continue receiving a paycheck from the District of Columbia.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Please put the lower level DC police and Unified Communications employees under oath by DC City Council hearings or Federal Grand Jury. A DC GOVERNMENT employee or employees intentionally erased the tapes. By D.C Code statutes that’s a criminal offense.</p>
<p>22-2402. Perjury<br />
a) A person commits the offense of perjury if:</p>
<p>(1) Having taken an oath or affirmation before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in a case in which the law authorized such oath or affirmation to be administered, that he or she will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by that person subscribed is true, wilfully and contrary to an oath or affirmation states or subscribes any material matter which he or she does not believe to be true and which in fact is not true; or </p>
<p>(2) As a notary public or other officer authorized to take proof of certification, wilfully certifies falsely that an instrument was acknowledged by any party thereto or wilfully certifies falsely as to another material matter in an acknowledgement. </p>
<p>(b) Any person convicted of perjury shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.</p>
<p>22-2404. False swearing<br />
(a) A person commits the offense of false swearing if under oath or affirmation he or she wilfully makes a false statement, in writing, that is in fact material and the statement is one which is required by law to be sworn or affirmed before a notary public or other person authorized to administer oaths.</p>
<p>b) Any person convicted of false swearing shall be fined not more than $2,500 or imprisoned for not more than 3 years, or both.</p>
<p>22-2405. False statements<br />
(a) A person commits the offense of making false statements if that person wilfully makes a false statement that is in fact material, in writing, directly or indirectly, to any instrumentality of the District of Columbia government, under circumstances in which the statement could reasonably be expected to be relied upon as true; provided, that the writing indicates that the making of a false statement is punishable by criminal penalties.</p>
<p>(b) Any person convicted of making false statements shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than 180 days, or both.</p>
<p>22-1805a. Conspiracy to commit crime.<br />
(a) If 2 or more persons conspire either to commit a criminal offense or to defraud the District of Columbia or any court or agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, each shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, except that if the object of the conspiracy is a criminal offense punishable by less than 5 years, the maximum penalty for the conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum penalty provided for that offense.</p>
<p>(b) No person may be convicted of conspiracy unless an overt act is alleged and proved to have been committed by 1 of the conspirators pursuant to the conspiracy and to effect its purpose.</p>
<p>(c) When the object of a conspiracy contrived within the District of Columbia is to engage in conduct in a jurisdiction outside the District of Columbia which would constitute a criminal offense under an act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia if performed therein, the conspiracy is a violation of this section if:</p>
<p>(1) Such conduct would also constitute a crime under the laws of the other jurisdiction if performed therein; or </p>
<p>(2) Such conduct would constitute a criminal offense under an act of Congress exclusively applicable to the District of Columbia even if performed outside the District of Columbia. </p>
<p>(d) A conspiracy contrived in another jurisdiction to engage in conduct within the District of Columbia which would constitute a criminal offense under an act of Congress exclusively applicable to the District of Columbia if performed within the District of Columbia is a violation of this section when an overt act pursuant to the conspiracy is committed within the District of Columbia. Under such circumstances, it is immaterial and no defense to a prosecution for conspiracy that the conduct which is the object of the conspiracy would not constitute a crime under the laws of the other jurisdiction.</p>
<p>22-2403 Subornation of perjury<br />
A person commits the offense of subornation of perjury if that person wilfully procures another to commit perjury. Any person convicted of subornation of perjury shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.</p>
<p>22-704. Corrupt influence; officials. </p>
<p>(a) Whosoever corruptly, directly or indirectly, gives any money, or other bribe, present, reward, promise, contract, obligation, or security for the payment of any money, present, reward, or thing of value to any ministerial, administrative, executive, or judicial officer of the District of Columbia, or any employee, or other person acting in any capacity for the District of Columbia, or any agency thereof, either before or after the officer, employee, or other person acting in any capacity for the District of Columbia is qualified, with intent to influence such official’s action on any matter which is then pending, or may by law come or be brought before such official in such official’s official capacity, or to cause such official to execute any of the powers in such official vested, or to perform any duties of such official required, with partiality or favor, or otherwise than is required by law, or in consideration that such official being authorized in the line of such official’s duty to contract for any advertising or for the furnishing of any labor or material, shall directly or indirectly arrange to receive or shall receive, or shall withhold from the parties so contracted with, any portion of the contract price, whether that price be fixed by law or by agreement, or in consideration that such official has nominated or appointed any person to any office or exercised any power in such official vested, or performed any duty of such official required, with partiality or favor, or otherwise contrary to law; and whosoever, being such an official, shall receive any such money, bribe, present, or reward, promise, contract, obligation, or security, with intent or for the purpose or consideration aforesaid shall be deemed guilty of bribery and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by imprisonment for a term not less than 6 months nor more than 5 years.</p>
<p>(b) Whosoever corrupts or attempts, directly or indirectly, to corrupt any special master, auditor, juror, arbitrator, umpire, or referee, by giving, offering, or promising any gift or gratuity whatever, with intent to bias the opinion, or influence the decision of such official, in relation to any matter pending in the court, or before an inquest, or for the decision of which such arbitrator, umpire, or referee has been chosen or appointed, and every official who receives, or offers or agrees to receive, a bribe in any of the cases above mentioned shall be guilty of bribery and upon conviction thereof shall be punished as hereinbefore provided.<br />
22-722. Prohibited acts; penalty. </p>
<p>(a) A person commits the offense of obstruction of justice if that person:</p>
<p>(1) Knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, threatens or corruptly persuades another person, or by threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede a juror in the discharge of the juror’s official duties; </p>
<p>(2) Knowingly uses intimidating or physical force, threatens or corruptly persuades another person, or by threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede a witness or officer in any official proceeding, with intent to: </p>
<p>(A) Influence, delay, or prevent the truthful testimony of the person in an official proceeding; </p>
<p>(B) Cause or induce the person to withhold truthful testimony or a record, document, or other object from an official proceeding; </p>
<p>(C) Evade a legal process that summons the person to appear as a witness or produce a document in an official proceeding; or </p>
<p>(D) Cause or induce the person to be absent from a legal official proceeding to which the person has been summoned by legal process; </p>
<p>(3) Harasses another person with the intent to hinder, delay, prevent, or dissuade the person from: </p>
<p>(A) Attending or testifying truthfully in an official proceeding; </p>
<p>(B) Reporting to a law enforcement officer the commission of, or any information concerning, a criminal offense; </p>
<p>(C) Arresting or seeking the arrest of another person in connection with the commission of a criminal offense; or </p>
<p>(D) Causing a criminal prosecution or a parole or probation revocation proceeding to be sought or instituted, or assisting in a prosecution or other official proceeding; </p>
<p>(4) Injures any person or his or her property on account of the person or any other person giving to a criminal investigator in the course of any criminal investigation information related to a violation of any criminal statute in effect in the District of Columbia; </p>
<p>(5) Injures any person or his or her property on account of the person or any other person performing his official duty as a juror, witness, or officer in any court in the District of Columbia; or </p>
<p>(6) Corruptly, or by threats of force, any way obstructs or impedes or endeavors to obstruct or impede the due administration of justice in any official proceeding. </p>
<p>(b) Any person convicted of obstruction of justice shall be sentenced to a maximum period of incarceration of not less than 3 years and not more than 30 years, or shall be fined not more than $10,000, or both. For purposes of imprisonment following revocation of release authorized by § 24-403.01, obstruction of justice is a Class A felony.</p>
<p>22-723. Tampering with physical evidence; penalty.<br />
(a) A person commits the offense of tampering with physical evidence if, knowing or having reason to believe an official proceeding has begun or knowing that an official proceeding is likely to be instituted, that person alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, or removes a record, document, or other object, with intent to impair its integrity or its availability for use in the official proceeding.</p>
<p>(b) Any person convicted of tampering with physical evidence shall be fined not more than $5,000, imprisoned for not more than 3 years, or both.</p>
<p>It’s time to hold DC GOVERMENT employees accountable. This multi-million dollar PershingGATE alleged crimes created by “Ramsey, Lanier and Newsham, LLP ” must be investigated criminally to result in indictments and guilty pleas.</p>
<p>Plus, disbarments for AG’s office and MPD General Counsel’s Office attorneys.</p>
<p>The Honorable Councilmembers Cheh and Mendelson please investigate immediately the corruption that occurred with PershingGATE. Please do not allow the DC GOVERNMENT employees involved in this massive cover-up to continue receiving a paycheck from the District of Columbia.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Pershing Park Case: Did A District Official Commit Perjury? - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-642265</link>
		<dc:creator>The Pershing Park Case: Did A District Official Commit Perjury? - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 20:47:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-642265</guid>
		<description>[...] week, news broke out of U.S. District Court regarding the troubling Office of the Attorney General&#8217;s handling of a Pershing Park civil suit. The judge in that case called on the D.C. Council to open an investigation into alleged OAG [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] week, news broke out of U.S. District Court regarding the troubling Office of the Attorney General&#8217;s handling of a Pershing Park civil suit. The judge in that case called on the D.C. Council to open an investigation into alleged OAG [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Nickles: I Will Not Call You Back - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-642218</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Nickles: I Will Not Call You Back - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 17:14:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-642218</guid>
		<description>[...] I had hoped he would provide insightful and erudite commentary on the issue before his desk&#8212;his office&#8217;s utter failings in the Pershing Park case. Last week, a U.S. District Court judge slammed the OAG for multiple discovery violations. The [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I had hoped he would provide insightful and erudite commentary on the issue before his desk&#8212;his office&#8217;s utter failings in the Pershing Park case. Last week, a U.S. District Court judge slammed the OAG for multiple discovery violations. The [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mystery Shooting In Columbia Heights: Loose Lips Daily - City Desk - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2009/07/31/pershing-park-case-now-its-all-about-the-cover-up-nickles-faces-huge-test-in-u-s-district-court/comment-page-1/#comment-642190</link>
		<dc:creator>Mystery Shooting In Columbia Heights: Loose Lips Daily - City Desk - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 15:12:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/?p=28533#comment-642190</guid>
		<description>[...] CASE YOU MISSED IT&#8212;&#8221;Pershing Park Case: Now It&#8217;s All About The Coverup; Nickles Faces Huge Test In U.S. District C...,&#8221; and &#8220;Councilmember Cheh Calls For Nickles To [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] CASE YOU MISSED IT&#8212;&#8221;Pershing Park Case: Now It&#8217;s All About The Coverup; Nickles Faces Huge Test In U.S. District C...,&#8221; and &#8220;Councilmember Cheh Calls For Nickles To [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

