[討論] ChatGPT幫我找的國會說謊坐牢條文
不知道對不對
你們自己看吧
美國
LII U.S. Code Title 18 PART I CHAPTER 47 ? 1001
Quick search by citation:
Title
Section
18 U.S. Code ? 1001 - Statements or entries generally
U.S. Code
Notes
prev | next
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of
這裡的legislative指的應該就是美國國會
the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves
說謊會被判五年以下有期徒刑
international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party’s counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to—
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.
英國
Perjury.
(1)If any person lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which heknows to be false or does not believe to be true, he shall be guilty of perjury, and shall, on conviction thereof on indictment, be liable to penal servitude for a term not exceeding seven years, or to imprisonment . . . F1 for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine or to both
說謊會被判兩年以下有期徒刑
such penal servitude or imprisonment and fine.
(2)The expression “judicial proceeding” includes a proceeding before any cou
rt, tribunal, or person having by law power to hear, receive, and examine evidence on oath.
這邊看起來都是在講法院審判
除了person having by law power to hear, receive, and examine evidence on oath.
立委算是有檢視證據權力的人嗎?
如果算的話
那ChatGPT就沒有找錯
(3)Where a statement made for the purposes of a judicial proceeding is not made before the tribunal itself, but is made on oath before a person authorised by law to administer an oath to the person who makes the statement, and to record or authenticate the statement, it shall, for the purposes of this section,be treated as having been made in a judicial proceeding.
(4)A statement made by a person lawfully sworn in England for the purposes ofa judicial proceeding—
(a)in another part of His Majesty’s dominions; or
(b)in a British tribunal lawfully constituted in any place by sea or land outside His Majesty’s dominions; or
(c)in a tribunal of any foreign state,
shall, for the purposes of this section, be treated as a statement made in a judicial proceeding in England.
(5)Where, for the purposes of a judicial proceeding in England, a person is lawfully sworn under the authority of an Act of Parliament—
(a)in any other part of His Majesty’s dominions; or
(b)before a British tribunal or a British officer in a foreign country, or within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England;
a statement made by such person so sworn as aforesaid (unless the Act of Parliament under which it was made otherwise specifically provides) shall be treated for the purposes of this section as having been made in the judicial proceeding in England for the purposes whereof it was made.
(6)The question whether a statement on which perjury is assigned was materia
l is a question of law to be determined by the court of trial.
https://i.imgur.com/s1qK43a.jpeg
看起來ChatGPT美國的部分沒有講錯
--
偽證罪和藐視國會罪先分清楚吧
你可以解釋一下上面的法條是偽證罪還是藐視國會罪嗎?
※ 編輯: lono (123.192.202.62 臺灣), 06/20/2024 00:47:50
chatgpt基本上都在唬爛
尤其是法律問題 一堆律師用然後用到
假判例被懲處的
條文是我自己上網抓的 不是ChatGPT掰的 你看一下條文內容對不對
川普的御用律師Cohen就是最新的受害者
美國的藐視國會主要處罰讓國會"拿不到
資料"的行為如傳你不來,你不交資料,
不回答問題。
那上面的法條是什麼罪?有處罰在國會說謊嗎?
你先搞清楚海洋法系跟大陸法系的不同
可以嗎?
這和法系無關 純粹討論其他國家國會說謊會如何
偽證是另一回事。黃國昌都混在一起了
那段?我不知道
又一個亂湊的,聽證、質詢你會分嗎?
黃國昌騙你,你就被他騙?
台灣的我會分 美國英國的我不會 你幫我把上面的條文分類一下
※ 編輯: lono (123.192.202.62 臺灣), 06/20/2024 00:50:34※ 編輯: lono (123.192.202.62 臺灣), 06/20/2024 00:52:23
中華民國是五權憲法大陸法系,美國是三權
分立海洋法系
witness看不懂嗎? 能有程度一點好嗎
國會聽「證」 這個「證」的確是witness的意思 不然你的英文老師怎麼教?
你這樣說簡直是在檢討魚有鰓所以我們要
幫狗裝鰓
黃國昌在質詢說謊就不用罰,但可以罰別人
這我知道 你看國會改革法條文就知道了 你要表達什麼?
魚有鰓適應很好不代表狗要有鰓,美國有
不代表台灣要有
我這篇只是在討論美國和英國有沒有 不是在討論台灣
瞎幾把亂湊亂縫合 只會讓法條自我矛盾
要往美國去請先修憲
表達反質詢罪的不合理
聽證和質詢是不同的,你那是聽證的部分
你還是沒有解釋黃國昌騙我什麼? 我知道國外沒有反質詢罪 但是國會聽證說謊會被抓去關 台灣只會罰錢 我們的想法一致嗎?
※ 編輯: lono (123.192.202.62 臺灣), 06/20/2024 01:07:05
你可以先搞懂聽證跟質詢的不同嗎?
我早就搞懂了 你能講一些有內容的東西嗎?
黃說藐視國會和國外聽證調查一樣,反質詢
他什麼時候講的? 有連結嗎?
ChatDPP被綠共收起來,是不是太多實話
資訊被統整怕被人民知道?自以為想搭
上AI熱線,但確搞到自己呢
等非聽證的罪加進去那有一樣
謝達文這篇可以看看,寫的相對簡單。裡
面還有另一篇,有些概念你可以先建立。
相對來說,美國就有發展出形式處罰,就必須牽涉到法院。對美國人而言,國會針對個案判 斷完之後,是否有權力自己去抓人、處罰,這是有疑慮的。所以在美國如果要走到處罰程序 ,其實就是刑事訴訟的邏輯。是由國會相關委員會會先議決證人構成藐視,提到院會全院再 表決,確認有藐視行為之後,議長會把案件轉到檢察體系,由檢調去判斷是否構成,而國會 不能指揮檢察體系。 這就是黃國昌昨天質詢講的內容 然後行政院長一直跳針 傻眼
而且台灣藐視國會是多數黨決定,也就是
多數黨有實質調查權
大法官承認立法院有調查權 只是有限制 釋585 基於權力分立與制衡原則,立法院調查權所得調查之對象或事項,並非毫無限制 所以有什麼問題?
※ 編輯: lono (123.192.202.62 臺灣), 06/20/2024 01:24:06
拜託~裡面的文字看清楚好不好,寫那麼
你解釋一下啊
多你只簡化成「說謊會被判五年以下有期
徒刑」?
現在是只要能「把任何人抓去關」你就爽
了就對了是不是?構成要件完全不重要欸
你解釋一下啊
※ 編輯: lono (123.192.202.62 臺灣), 06/20/2024 01:28:17※ 編輯: lono (123.192.202.62 臺灣), 06/20/2024 01:28:43
※ 編輯: lono (123.192.202.62 臺灣), 06/20/2024 01:31:49
某人就唬爛槓精
我在等回答
14樓 17樓 所以大陸法系 國會不能說
謊 海洋法系就可以在國會說謊?
立法就是創新啊 自己沒有別人有 那就
自己加啊 能不能加還要看法系勒?
看到甚麼海洋法大陸法就知道從脆來的
可憐 連自己在講啥都不知道 別人餵甚麼
就吃甚麼
民眾普遍的認知明明是看 在什麼地方
對什麼人說謊 吱蟑側翼硬要洗要看法
系
就像吱蟑所謂的大陸法系 偽證罪是在
法庭對法官說謊 海洋法系也是在法庭
對法官說謊
都是看地方和對象
36
[情報] Re-entry banWhat is a re-entry ban A re-entry ban, also known as an exclusion period, means a person may not be able to return to Australia for up to three years. A re-entry ban may be imposed when a person breaches their visa conditions.22
[問卦] 總統府的英文 很奇怪?各位八卦可憐肥宅 晚安 我說的是 那個 語言的英文啦 就是啊 你看五院的英文23
[問卦] 台灣有多少人去美國生小孩?All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any5
Re: [討論] 為什麼國會擴權是反民主啊?誰告訴你的? 你叫我搞清楚脈絡 那意思是你連自己在說什麼都不知道? 你說台版藐視國會罪的廣度是別人沒有的? 這兩句話就不是事實 還在怪人家去脈絡化 你說 小夫欠你1000塊不還 所以才說他沒雞雞7
Re: [問卦]倫敦政經學院的判決是真的嗎?相關判決連結: (michael)+AND+(richardson) 我似乎沒有找到另一個上訴人是Michael Richardson而且在2022的判決 Conclusion 22. The Decision Notice concluded on the balance of probabilities that LSE didX
Re: [新聞] 黃國昌嗆經濟學人自砸招牌、丟臉! 要小我承認第一時間使用機翻造成誤解 在此跟mlkj致歉 但是 自由時報標題帶風向,苗博雅/吳沛憶/黃捷/沈伯洋造謠是事實- 台灣我是不太清楚 但美國確實有可能會被要求要迴避 按美國Model Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 2.11來看 (5) The judge, while a judge or a judicial candidate,* has made a public statement, other than in a court proceeding, judicial decision, or opinion, that commits or appears to commit the judge to reach a particular result or
37
[轉錄] 賴清德FB:巴奈的感言我們不忘記49
[轉錄] 沈伯洋 FB-闢謠34
[討論] 吳崢親自到基隆體驗謝國樑最自豪的政績84
[討論] 有點扯 罷謝國樑前天才3萬份 一下就3.6萬19
[討論] 金曲出現青鳥了!!!小草不要看25
[討論] 巴奈脫口提天安門 歌在中國全被消失21
[討論] 日本人蘇州遇襲案,中國網友反應熱烈14
[討論] 認真問如果黃國昌是區域立委罷免的掉嗎 ?19
[討論] 3Q陳柏惟當時應對罷免案的策略失誤之處18
[討論] 中國經濟衰退就事實18
[討論] 白藍有些人說討厭普選民主25
[討論] 謝國樑被罷掉 但能救整團立委 其實還是賺17
[討論] 大家知道跟金曲獎同樣35週年還有哪些事?13
[討論] 罷免門檻要怎麼修才合理10
[討論] 沈伯洋最好笑的代表作是什麼?14
Re: [討論] 拆樑第三階段很難過吧...13
[討論] 金曲獎歌手直接提政治了!!還講天安門11
[討論] 原來「大家晚上好」是支語喔?41
[討論] 黃國昌:謝國樑市政好,請給他掌聲13
Re: [轉錄] 沈伯洋 FB-闢謠9
[討論] DPP青年部主任:年輕人支持度民眾黨最高!12
Re: [討論] 罷免門檻要怎麼修才合理5
[討論] 沈柏洋最大的問題45
[討論] 沈伯洋一定做對了什麼 要紅藍白全員出11
[討論] 吳子嘉要告發新華社趙博8
Re: [討論] 沈伯洋:中國會根據你看的A片型態 來分類9
[討論] 拆樑第三階段很難過吧...10
[討論] 為何罷免侯友宜無法達標9
[黑特] 別管別人怎麼說!徐巧芯談網路霸凌10
[討論] 今天的KPI是不是討論片片啊?