# A Few Good Men...a question about perjury. **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [February 22, 2016, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805 "2016-02-22T15:41:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Horatio\_Hellpop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Horatio\_Hellpop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatio_Hellpop)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/21 "2016-02-24T04:53:04Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > A Few Good Men is probably one of those movies we’ve all seen several times. I enjoyed it, yet it always leaves me wanting to rewrite the ending and get that lying sack of crap Lieutenant Kendrick arrested for perjuring himself regarding ordering the Code Red. The consequences of that perjury could have played a significant part in an unjust conviction of Dawson and Downey. In the movie, Kendrick, as far as I can tell, escapes even a comment regarding his perjury. > > I was reading Wiki about the movie when I discovered this. \* Kendrick would later be arrested for his perjury\*. Is that an assumption, or did I miss something, or what the heck is later referring to? > [A Few Good Men - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Few_Good_Men) Kevin Bacon character’s last bit of dialogue was something along the lines of this: BACON: I have to go arrest Kendrick now. CRUISE: Give him my regards! BACON (smirking): I will! ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/22 "2016-02-24T05:17:50Z")
> [@Horatio\_Hellpop](#): > > Kevin Bacon character’s last bit of dialogue was something along the lines of this: > BACON: I have to go arrest Kendrick now. > CRUISE: Give him my regards! > BACON (smirking): I will! See Posts #5 and #6. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/23 "2016-02-24T14:52:21Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > I hate to bring reality into this. 😃 > > Gitmo is a Navy base. The base commander is a Naval officer. Jessup was the commander of the Marine Security Forces on the base. He was not the commander of Gitmo. By the time I was deployed there that position was a Major slot and I used to go to the weekly poker game at his quarters. I saw a list of past commanders and it did indeed used to be a full bird colonel position. In order to go over Jessup’s head he wouldn’t have to go far. It still probably would have ruined his career anyway since Jessup had clout beyond his relatively low rank. Perhaps Kendrik’s trial might make a great A Few Good Men II movie. That poor guy was afraid of Jessup’s power, loved the USMC, and between a rock and a hard place. An O2 probably wouldn’t question an 06’s order, even one like that. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/24 "2016-02-24T15:18:00Z")
> [@mazinger\_z](#): > > I haven’t looked it up but there are many differences between a military court and a regular public court. Apparently it is a pretty major offense to accuse a superior officer of a crime without proof. One of the great aspects of this film is the interplay non-spoken dialect between Kaffee and Jessup: they both seemingly know that the accusation can’t be made but they both dance around the edge of it playing this cat and mouse game until Jessup eventually falls to it. Kaffee may not have proof, but he does have statements from Dawson and Markinson saying Jessup ordered the code red that killed Santiago, and testimony from another marine from that company that received a code red. He’s not just making shit up about Jessup for shits and giggles. ---
**Author:** ![Horatio\_Hellpop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Horatio\_Hellpop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatio_Hellpop)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/25 "2016-02-24T15:30:43Z")
> [@cochrane](#): > > See Posts #5 and #6. Yeah. When I wrote that–several hours earlier than the time stamp indicates–only Post #1 was appearing in my feed. It happens. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/26 "2016-02-24T15:51:57Z")
> [@Horatio\_Hellpop](#): > > Yeah. When I wrote that–several hours earlier than the time stamp indicates–only Post #1 was appearing in my feed. There wasn’t one several hours earlier? That landed at Andrews, at two in the morning? [These](http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0104257/) are the Tower Chiefs’ logs for Guantanamo Bay and Andrews: there’s _no_ flight at 11 pm, and no _arrival_ at 2 am! I’d like to admit these as Defense Exhibits Alpha and Bravo: as evidence of a flight that _never existed_ – but we believe it _did,_ sir! We call Airmen O’Malley and Rodriguez as rebuttal witnesses! ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/27 "2016-02-24T16:58:40Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Kaffee may not have proof, but he does have statements from Dawson and Markinson saying Jessup ordered the code red that killed Santiago, and testimony from another marine from that company that received a code red. He’s not just making shit up about Jessup for shits and giggles. He doesn’t have statements. Dawson never said anything about Jessup - he said Kendrick ordered him to do the Code Red. And Markinson was dead, and never said anything on the record about Jessup. ---
**Author:** ![crypto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b3f665/32.png) [@crypto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crypto)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/28 "2016-02-24T16:58:59Z")
This movie is enjoyable, but there are a few flaws that come out with regular viewings… My biggest question has always been, why did they put Downey on the stand, and not Dawson? Downey was clearly dim-witted, and they portray him this way consistently through the movie. Lance Corporal Downey was a “poster board marine”, well-spoken and would not have become confused on the stand. He could have been asked directly if he was given a direct order by Kendrick. Instead, they put Downey on the stand, who had to admit that he never heard the order from Kendrick, but got it from Dawson. I get that it makes the courtroom scene dialogue more dramatic, but it seems like sloppy prep work by such a smart lawyer like Caffey, and is not consistent with his character. Did the book have Dawson on the stand, and they just cut that out of the movie? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/29 "2016-02-24T17:04:49Z")
> [@crypto](#): > > This movie is enjoyable, but there are a few flaws that come out with regular viewings… > > My biggest question has always been, why did they put Downey on the stand, and not Dawson? Downey was clearly dim-witted, and they portray him this way consistently through the movie. Lance Corporal Downey was a “poster board marine”, well-spoken and would not have become confused on the stand. > > He could have been asked directly if he was given a direct order by Kendrick. Instead, they put Downey on the stand, who had to admit that he never heard the order from Kendrick, but got it from Dawson. Did the firm of Cruise Moore & Pollak know Downey hadn’t heard it from Kendrick? > [@](#): > > I get that it makes the courtroom scene dialogue more dramatic, but it seems like sloppy prep work by such a smart lawyer like Caffey, and is not consistent with his character. He’s not the one who prepped Downey; at Aunt Ginny’s request, remember? ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/30 "2016-02-24T17:41:20Z")
> [@crypto](#): > > This movie is enjoyable, but there are a few flaws that come out with regular viewings… > > My biggest question has always been, why did they put Downey on the stand, and not Dawson? Downey was clearly dim-witted, and they portray him this way consistently through the movie. Lance Corporal Downey was a “poster board marine”, well-spoken and would not have become confused on the stand. > > He could have been asked directly if he was given a direct order by Kendrick. Instead, they put Downey on the stand, who had to admit that he never heard the order from Kendrick, but got it from Dawson. > > I get that it makes the courtroom scene dialogue more dramatic, but it seems like sloppy prep work by such a smart lawyer like Caffey, and is not consistent with his character. > > Did the book have Dawson on the stand, and they just cut that out of the movie? Either they were planning on putting Dawson on the stand after Downey, but didn’t bother after the flat tire fiasco, or they put him on first but it was too boring to put in the movie. And I think you’re misreading it. If they’re going to claim both Marines heard Kendrick give the order, they’ve got to put both of them on the stand. Downey was confused because he got caught in a flat out lie. A lie that he and Dawson had clearly, obviously planned together. Once that happened, and Downey admitted that Dawson ordered him to assist in the Code Red, Dawson’s testimony became completely meaningless. ETA: Prep had nothing to do with hit. Dawson and Downey lied to their own lawyers, and got caught. ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/31 "2016-02-24T17:51:34Z")
Too late to edit again - check out the end of [this scene](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwoW2G3Cw-A), where they’re figuring out what to do after Downey’s testimony: “Maybe we’ll put Downey back on the stand before we get to Dawson.” So the plan was always Downey, then Dawson. But once Downey got caught lying, there was no point. (BTW, the clip cuts off before one of the funniest lines of the movie - “Maybe if we work at it, we can get Dawson charged with the Kennedy assassination”). ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/32 "2016-02-24T18:04:08Z")
> [@muldoonthief](#): > > He doesn’t have statements. Dawson never said anything about Jessup - he said Kendrick ordered him to do the Code Red. And Markinson was dead, and never said anything on the record about Jessup. Good points. I’m just saying that Kaffee has a good faith reason to believe that Dawson and Downey were acting on orders, and to press Kendrick and Jessup on whether they gave that order doesn’t seem like something he should be sanctioned for. ---
**Author:** ![Poysyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Poysyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Poysyn)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/33 "2016-02-24T18:06:08Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > There wasn’t one several hours earlier? > > That landed at Andrews, at two in the morning? > > [These](http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0104257/) are the Tower Chiefs’ logs for Guantanamo Bay and Andrews: there’s _no_ flight at 11 pm, and no _arrival_ at 2 am! I’d like to admit these as Defense Exhibits Alpha and Bravo: as evidence of a flight that _never existed_ – but we believe it _did,_ sir! We call Airmen O’Malley and Rodriguez as rebuttal witnesses! And they were handsome too, don’t you think? ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/34 "2016-02-24T18:13:58Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Good points. I’m just saying that Kaffee has a good faith reason to believe that Dawson and Downey were acting on orders, and to press Kendrick and Jessup on whether they gave that order doesn’t seem like something he should be sanctioned for. He did press Kendrick about it during his cross of Kendrick, but didn’t directly accuse him of it. His plan was to put his own clients on the stand to testify they were given the order by Kendrick, and then most likely call Kendrick again to directly accuse him of ordering the Code Red, but the flat tire screwup destroyed that plan. So at that point, even though he had a “good faith” reason to believe Jessup ordered it, he had nothing he could present to the court to allow him to take that line of questioning. ---
**Author:** ![Kimballkid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b5a626/32.png) [@Kimballkid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimballkid)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2016, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/35 "2016-02-24T20:45:46Z")
> [@Hail\_Ants](#): > > I actually only finally watched this film the other day(!) As I recall Ross said that at the minimum it would destroy his career/reputation. He’d be dishonorably discharged and that would be on his resume as a lawyer forever (he was a Harvard Law School grad from an old money family). Maybe he said that if he went \*too far \*in his questioning of Jessup he could maybe even wind up in the stockade too, then be dishonorably discharged etc. As stated above there are some significant differences between military and civilian courts and law. Even though he was the defense counsel questioning a witness the judge did tell Tom Cruise (who was only a lieutenant) to address Jessup as ‘sir’ or ‘colonel’. The jury also consisted of only nine officers (not twelve) from the different military services. They didn’t get into it but I’m not sure if the jury’s verdict even has to be unanimous or just a majority. Haven’t seen the movie in awhile but didn’t the judge at one point admonish Kaffee to ‘watch himself’ when he was getting a little over zealous with the questioning of a superior officer? ---
**Author:** ![rsat3acr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a3d4f5/32.png) [@rsat3acr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rsat3acr)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2016, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/36 "2016-02-25T00:14:34Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > There wasn’t one several hours earlier? > > That landed at Andrews, at two in the morning? > > [These](http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0104257/) are the Tower Chiefs’ logs for Guantanamo Bay and Andrews: there’s _no_ flight at 11 pm, and no _arrival_ at 2 am! I’d like to admit these as Defense Exhibits Alpha and Bravo: as evidence of a flight that _never existed_ – but we believe it _did,_ sir! We call Airmen O’Malley and Rodriguez as rebuttal witnesses! For the win:D ---
**Author:** ![crypto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b3f665/32.png) [@crypto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crypto)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2016, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/37 "2016-02-27T15:31:13Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Did the firm of Cruise Moore & Pollak know Downey hadn’t heard it from Kendrick? > > He’s not the one who prepped Downey; at Aunt Ginny’s request, remember? They should have known. They were ALL prepping Downey, and realized how slow he was. Remember the scene where Weinberg and Caffey were prepping Downey? Caffey admonished Downey for calling Santiago “Willie”, so Caffey was part of Downey’s prep. > [@muldoonthief](#): > > And I think you’re misreading it. If they’re going to claim both Marines heard Kendrick give the order, they’ve got to put both of them on the stand. Downey was confused because he got caught in a flat out lie. A lie that he and Dawson had clearly, obviously planned together. Once that happened, and Downey admitted that Dawson ordered him to assist in the Code Red, Dawson’s testimony became completely meaningless. > > ETA: Prep had nothing to do with hit. Dawson and Downey lied to their own lawyers, and got caught. Maybe you are right and I misread it. And maybe you are correct that Downey and Dawson lied to their lawyers and got caught. It could be as simple as that. But that doesn’t seem credible to me. If Smiling Jack could find out about the blow-out, Caffey and co. should have been able to, also. But I concede they could have missed it. What makes it sloppy to me is that Dawson does not strike me as a person who would concoct a lie. Downey does not strike me as a person who could be counted on to maintain a lie, and Dawson would know that. When the lie is unraveled, Dawson immediately tells Downey to answer the Captain’s question, so he doesn’t try to maintain anything. He takes the blame. Which brings me to another “flaw”. Why wouldn’t Dawson just tell his lawyers that he gave the order to Downey after getting the order from Kendrick? That is a linear story, it is the truth, and it doesn’t change Dawson or Downey’s fate. There is no real credible reason to concoct the lie; Put Dawson on the stand, he confirms the order was given to him by Kendrick, and whether Dawson got the order from him or Kendrick was immaterial. Both Dawson and Downey were still going to be charged with murder. The case would still have boiled down to Dawson’s word against Kendrick’s. In short, there was no NEED for the lie. Again, I realize the scene adds tension and drama (actually it adds two scenes, one in the court room and one for the aftermath) and it isn’t something I noticed on the first viewing. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2016, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/38 "2016-02-27T15:51:55Z")
> [@crypto](#): > > Maybe you are right and I misread it. And maybe you are correct that Downey and Dawson lied to their lawyers and got caught. It could be as simple as that. But that doesn’t seem credible to me. If Smiling Jack could find out about the blow-out, Caffey and co. should have been able to, also. Smiling Jack could’ve had an advantage: _Kendrick_ would’ve surely known Downey wasn’t there at the time, since he and Dawson were the only guys in the room. (Kendrick can’t come out and say that to Jack, but he’d have the head start of knowing that Downey, _who was supposed to be there,_ was somewhere else; if Kendrick is minimally competent to ask why, he’s presumably going to find out.) ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2016, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/39 "2016-02-27T17:38:31Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Kendrick was really screwed regardless of what he did. > [@Chronos](#): > > Isn’t the standard procedure in cases like this to refuse the illegal order, and to immediately go over the head of the person who gave you the order? Yabbut, then Jessup would have ordered a code red on _him_… ---
**Author:** ![crypto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b3f665/32.png) [@crypto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crypto)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2016, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805/40 "2016-02-27T19:19:00Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Smiling Jack could’ve had an advantage: _Kendrick_ would’ve surely known Downey wasn’t there at the time, since he and Dawson were the only guys in the room. > > (Kendrick can’t come out and say that to Jack, but he’d have the head start of knowing that Downey, _who was supposed to be there,_ was somewhere else; if Kendrick is minimally competent to ask why, he’s presumably going to find out.) I thought of this. But there was no way for Ross to know that Downey was going to tell that story on the stand before he actually testified. There were two people who were in the room when the order was given: Kendrick and Dawson. While preparing for the case, each side had one witness to the event in question. IANAL, but I would think that if the prosecution looked at the log books to see where Downey was on the day in question (and the time it was logged into the motor pool) as part of discovery they would have to show that log book to the defense. They may not have to tell the defense _why_ they were looking at the log book, but the defense should have been curious. I can’t recall if the log had Downey’s name in it, but wouldn’t the defense try to understand what the prosecution was looking for? Caffey is portrayed as a brilliant lawyer. Checking out Downey’s wherabouts on the day the meeting between Dawson and Kendrick took place seems (to me, anyway) something they would have done. Unless, of course, discovery would not have indicated the prosecution was using the log book for their case. Maybe a lawyer could tell us. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-few-good-men-a-question-about-perjury/746805.md?page=3)