Prosecutors say the defendants lied to the bankers about how the money would be used.

The only problem with Hollywood's version, Lynn said, is that the defendant was lying.

That cloud remains because the defendant obstructed justice and lied about what happened.

Ms. Stamms, a 51-year-old food service manager, said the defendants "are all lying."

The defendants apparently lied to him back then because evidence introduced earlier in the trial, some of it from their own government, contradicts them.

Prosecutors said the defendants then lied to investigators about the incident.

The drawback to this claim is that the defendant (usually the manufacturer) must lie shown to have been negligent.

The defendant must lie proved to have had this mental state, i.e. knowledge or recklessness.

In this case too, a defendant can lie without consequences.

To create a Western-style court system, she said, it was necessary to teach defendants to lie.