False statements in a political contribution conduit scheme
This case is about a corporation that collected individual campaign contributions from employees and then illegally paid them back for their contributions. A state senator’s brother was the corporate official who collected the employees’ checks, then returned them. Since his brother paid the senator back for a loan he had made to him personally at the very same time the employees’ reimbursement checks were issued, the prosecutor called the senator to testify during indictment hearings of his brother and other company officials. During his grand jury testimony, the senator and the prosecutor used the word, “reimburse,” to refer to different things, leading to his indictment for perjury. The chapter deals with issues relating to the speech act of reimbursing, the lack of mutual understanding, the speech act of requesting clarification, intention, and grammatical clarity.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.