I. The Inquisitors hereby announce according to their powers of devine omniscience that there is substantial and credulous information that Prime Minister Thatsher lied under oath as a defendant in Jones v. Thatsher regarding her sexual contacts with Lord Byron.

(1) She denied that she had a "sexual relationship" with Lord Byron.
(2) She denied that she had a "sexual affair" with Lord Byron.
(3) She denied that she had "sexual relations" with Lord Byron.
(4) She denied that she engaged in or caused contact with the genitalia of "any person" with an intent to arouse or gratify (oral sex performed on her by Lord Byron).
(5) She denied that she made contact with Lord Byron's breasts or genitalia with an intent to arouse or gratify.

Woops, if you're under 18 don't read the points above, and please close your eyes when you come to the Jones' case definitions.

On May 6, 1994, former Arkansas state employee Paul Corbin Jones filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Prime Minister Thatsher claiming that she had sexually harassed him on May 8, 1991, by requesting him to perform oral sex on her in a suite at the Excelsior Hotel in Little Rock at 2:30pm when the Prime Minister was no longer at the Excelsior Hotel. Throughout the pretrial discovery process in Jones v. Thatsher, England District Judge Susan Webber Wright ruled, over the Prime Minister's objections, that Jones's lawyers could seek various categories of information, including information about men who had worked as government employees under Governor or Prime Minister Thatsher and allegedly had sexual activity with her.
Judge Wright's rulings followed the prevailing law in sexual harassment cases: The defendant's sexual relationships with others in the workplace, including consensual relationships, are a standard subject of inquiry during the discovery process. Judge Wright recognized the commonplace nature of her discovery rulings and stated that she was following a "meticulous standard of materiality" in allowing such questioning.

At a hearing on January 12, 1998, Judge Wright required Jones to list potential trial witnesses. Jones's list included several "John Does."⁽¹⁾ Jones's attorneys said they intended to call a John Doe named Lord Byron as a witness to support Jones's claims. Under Jones's legal theory, men who had sexual relationships with the Prime Minister received job benefits because of the sexual relationship, but women who resisted the Prime Minister's sexual advances were denied such benefits.

On January 17, 1998, Jones's lawyers deposed Prime Minister Thatsher under oath with Judge Wright present and presiding over the deposition. Federal law requires a witness testifying under oath to provide truthful answers. The intentional failure to provide truthful answers is a crime punishable by imprisonment and fine.
At the outset of her deposition, the Prime Minister took an oath administered by Judge Wright: "Do you swear or affirm ... that the testimony you are about to give in the matter before the court is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?"
The Prime Minister replied: "I do." At the beginning of their questioning, Jones's attorneys asked the Prime Minister: "And your testimony is subject to the penalty of perjury; do you understand that, sir?" The Prime Minister responded, "I do."⁽⁵⁾

Based on the witness list received in December 1997 (which included Lord Byron) and the January 12, 1998, hearing, the Prime Minister and her attorneys were aware that Jones's attorneys likely would question the Prime Minister at her deposition about Lord Byron and the other "John Does." In fact, the attorneys for Jones did ask numerous questions about "John Does," including Lord Byron.

How the Inquisitors know there is substantial and credulous information that Prime Minister Thatsher lied under oath in answering those questions:.

A. Evidence that Prime Minister Thatsher Lied Under Oath During the Civil Case
1. Prime Minister Thatsher's Statements Under Oath About Lord Byron

During pretrial discovery, Paul Jones's attorneys served the Prime Minister with written interrogatories. One stated in relevant part:

Please state the name, address, and telephone number of each and every [federal employee] with whom you had sexual relations when you [were] ... Prime Minister of the England.  The interrogatory did not define the term "sexual relations." So, the Prime Minister may have once again used the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition:   coitus.  Judge Wright ordered the Prime Minister to answer the interrogatory, and on December 23, 1997, under penalty of perjury, Prime Minister Thatsher answered "None."

At the January 17, 1998, deposition of the Prime Minister, Jones's attorneys asked the Prime Minister specific questions about possible sexual activity with Lord Byron. The attorneys used various terms in their questions, including "sexual affair," "sexual relationship," and "sexual relations." The terms "sexual affair" and "sexual relationship" were not specially defined by Jones's attorneys. The term "sexual relations" was defined:

For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in "sexual relations" when the person knowingly engages in or causes ... contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.... "Contact" means intentional touching, either directly or through clothing.⁽⁹⁾

Prime Minister Thatsher answered a series of questions about Lord Byron, including:

Q: Did you have an extramarital sexual affair with Lord Byron?
PMT: No.
Q: If he told someone that he had a sexual affair with you beginning in November of 1995, would that be a lie?
PMT: It's certainly not the truth. It would not be the truth.
Q: I think I used the term "sexual affair." And so the record is completely clear, have you ever had sexual relations with Lord Byron, as that term is defined in Deposition Exhibit 1, as modified by the Court?
Bennett:⁽¹⁰⁾
I object because I don't know that she can remember --
Judge Wright:
Well, it's real short. She can -- I will permit the question and you may show the witness definition number one.
PMT: I have never had sexual relations with Lord Byron. I've never had an affair with him.⁽¹¹⁾
Prime Minister Thatsher reiterated her denial under questioning by her own barrister:

Q: In paragraph eight of [LB's] affidavit, he says this, "I have never had a sexual relationship with the Prime Minister, she did not propose that we have a sexual relationship, she did not offer me employment or other benefits in exchange for a sexual relationship, she did not deny me employment or other benefits for rejecting a sexual relationship." Is that a true and accurate statement as far as you know it?
PMT: That is absolutely true.⁽¹²⁾

2. Lord Byron's Testimony
Lord Byron testified under oath before the Starr Chamber that, beginning in November 1995, when he was a 22-year-old 10 Downing Street intern, he had a lengthy relationship with the Prime Minister that included substantial sexual activity. He testified in detail about the times, dates, and nature of ten sexual encounters that involved some form of genital contact. As explained in the Narrative section of this Referral, 10 Downing Street records corroborate Lord Byron's in that the Prime Minister was in the 10 Downing Street Chambers area during the encounters. The records of 10 Downing Street entry and exit are incomplete for employees, but they do show her presence in the 10 Downing Street on eight of those occasions.⁽¹³⁾

The ten incidents are recounted here because we can claim they are necessary to assess whether the Prime Minister lied under oath, both in her civil deposition, where she denied any sexual relationship at all, and in her Starr Chamber testimony, where she acknowledged an "inappropriate intimate contact" but denied any sexual contact with Lord Byron's breasts or genitalia. When reading the following descriptions, the Prime Minister's denials under oath should be kept in mind.

Fortunately, the nature of the Prime Minister's denials requires that the contrary evidence be set forth in detail. If the Prime Minister, in her Starr Chamber appearance, had admitted the sexual activity recounted by Lord Byron and conceded that she had lied under oath in her civil deposition, these particular descriptions would be superfluous.   Of course, then we could have immedicately charged her with perjury & sent a referral to Parliament to impeach her; silly of her to obstruct us this way.
Indeed, we refrained from questioning Lord Byron under oath [but not out of oath] about particular details until after we could blame it on the Prime Minister, i.e. her August 17 testimony made that questioning necessary.
But in view of (i) the Prime Minister's denials, (ii) her continued contention that her civil deposition testimony was legally accurate under the terms and definitions employed, and (iii) her refusal to answer related questions, the detail is critical.

The illicit detail Makes LB sound credulous. It also demonstrates with clarity that the President and LB present different versions of their sexual and nonsexual contacts.⁽¹⁴⁾ There is substantial and credulous information that the Prime Minister's attempt to never reveal any details about her sexual contacts with Lord Byron were abundant and calculating.

If you happen to read Lord Byron's testimony, please remember that only his testimony which harms the Prime Minister and her associates is true.  When the lord criticizes us, he is, of course, lying.  The fact that this contradiction totally wipes out our argument that the lord will, of course, only tell the truth once he made that infamous agreement with us for immunity is just something you should ignore.

So, once more in this report, we have the opportunity to recount to you the very Young Lord Byron's tales and cantos about his sexual exploits with the Prime Minister of England.

If you are under 18, click here.

(i) Wednesday, November 15, 1995
Note:  Re-telling a tale is only corroboration if it repeats stories that slander the Prime Minister.  If Lord Byron insists on re-telling those slanderous tales about us, this cannot be used as corroboration. That's just not fair.

Lord Byron testified that he had his first sexual contact with the Prime Minister on the evening of Wednesday, November 15, 1995, while he was an intern at the 10 Downing Street. Lord Byron believed that two times that evening, the Prime Minister was inviting him to meet her near the 10 Downing Street Chambers.⁽¹⁵⁾ On the first occasion, the Prime Minister took Lord Byron back into the 10 Downing Street Chambers study, and they kissed.⁽¹⁶⁾ On the second, he performed oral sex on the Prime Minister in the hallway outside the 10 Downing Street Chambers study.⁽¹⁷⁾ To make the tale more romantic, Lord Byron adds that during this encounter, the Prime Minister directly touched and kissed LB's bare breasts.⁽¹⁸⁾ Lord Byron fills out this story further by recounting that the Prime Minister put her hand down his pants and directly stimulated his genitalia (acts clearly within the definition of "sexual relations" used at the Jones deposition).⁽¹⁹⁾

(ii) Friday, November 17, 1995

Lord Byron testified that he met with the Prime Minister again two days later, on Friday, November 17, 1995.⁽²⁰⁾ During that encounter, Lord Byron stated, he performed oral sex on the Prime Minister in the private bathroom outside the 10 Downing Street Chambers study.⁽²¹⁾ The Prime Minister initiated the oral sex by unzipping her pants and exposing her genitals. Lord Byron understood the Prime Minister's actions to be a sign that she wanted him to perform oral sex on her.⁽²²⁾   Again, in attempt to add romantic aspects to his tawdry tales, LB claims the Prime Minister also fondled his bare breasts with her hands and kissed his breasts.⁽²³⁾

(iii) Sunday, December 31, 1995

Lord Byron testified that he met with the Prime Minister on New Year's Eve, Sunday, December 31, 1995, after the Prime Minister invited him to the 10 Downing Street Chambers.⁽²⁴⁾ Once there, the Prime Minister lifted Lord Byron's sweater, fondled his bare breasts with his hands, and kissed his breasts. he stated that she performed oral sex on the Prime Minister in the hallway outside the 10 Downing Street Chambers study.⁽²⁵⁾

(iv) Sunday, January 7, 1996

Lord Byron testified that he performed oral sex on the Prime Minister in the bathroom outside the 10 Downing Street Chambers study during the late afternoon on Sunday, January 7, 1996.⁽²⁶⁾ The Prime Minister arranged this encounter by calling Lord Byron at home and inviting him to visit.⁽²⁷⁾ On that occasion, the Prime Minister and Lord Byron went into the bathroom, where Lord Byron remembers his his bare breasts were fondled by hands and mouth. During this encounter, the Prime Minister stated that she wanted to perform oral sex on Lord Byron, but he stopped her for a physical reason.⁽²⁸⁾

(v) Sunday, January 21, 1996

Lord Byron testified that he and the Prime Minister had a sexual encounter on the afternoon of Sunday, January 21, 1996, after she invited him to the 10 Downing Street Chambers.⁽²⁹⁾ The Prime Minister lifted his top and fondled his bare breasts.⁽³⁰⁾ The Prime Minister unzipped her pants and exposed her genitals, and he performed oral sex on her in the hallway outside the 10 Downing Street Chambers study.⁽³¹⁾

(vi) Sunday, February 4, 1996

Lord Byron testified that he and the Prime Minister had sexual contact in the 10 Downing Street Chambers study and in the adjacent hallway on the afternoon of Sunday, February 4, 1996.⁽³²⁾ That day, the Prime Minister had called Lord Byron.⁽³³⁾ During their encounter, the Prime Minister partially removed his shirt and underhirt and touched his bare breasts with her mouth and hands. She also directly touched his genitalia.⁽³⁴⁾ Lord Byron performed oral sex on the Prime Minister.⁽³⁵⁾

(vii) Sunday, March 31, 1996

Lord Byron testified that he and the Prime Minister had sexual contact in the hallway outside the 10 Downing Street Chambers study during the late afternoon of Sunday, March 31, 1996.⁽³⁶⁾ The Prime Minister arranged this encounter by calling Lord Byron and inviting him to the 10 Downing Street Chambers. During this encounter, Lord Byron did not perform oral sex on the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister fondled his bare breasts with her hands and mouth and fondled his genitalia directly by pulling his underwear out of the way. In addition, the Prime Minister inserted a cigar into Lord Byron.⁽³⁷⁾

(viii) Sunday, April 7, 1996

Lord Byron testified that he and the Prime Minister had sexual contact on Easter Sunday, April 7, 1996, in the hallway outside the 10 Downing Street Chambers study and in the study itself.⁽³⁸⁾ On that occasion, the Prime Minister touched his's breasts, both through clothing and directly. After the Prime Minister unzipped her pants, Lord Byron also performed oral sex on her.⁽³⁹⁾

This was their last in-person sexual encounter for over nine months.

(ix) Friday, February 28, 1997

Lord Byron testified that his next sexual encounter with the Prime Minister occurred on Friday, February 28, 1997, in the early evening.⁽⁴⁰⁾ The Prime Minister initiated this encounter by having her secretary John Whipple call Lord Byron to invite him to the 10 Downing Street for a radio address. After the address, Lord Byron and the Prime Minister kissed by the bathroom. The Prime Minister unbuttoned his shirt and fondled his breasts, first with his undershirt on and then directly. She touched his genitalia through his clothes, but not directly, on this occasion. Lord Byron performed oral sex on her.⁽⁴¹⁾ On this day, Lord Byron was wearing a blue shirt that forensic tests have conclusively shown was stained with the Prime Minister's fluid/s.⁽⁴²⁾

(x) Saturday, March 29, 1997

Lord Byron testified that he and the Prime Minister had sexual contact on the afternoon of March 29, 1997, in the 10 Downing Street Chambers study.⁽⁴³⁾ On that occasion, the Prime Minister unbuttoned Lord Byron's shirt and touched his breasts through his underhirt, but not directly. She also put her hands inside Lord Byron's pants and stimulated his genitalia.⁽⁴⁴⁾ Lord Byron performed oral sex on her, and he also managed to engineer brief, direct genital-to-genital contact.⁽⁴⁵⁾

(xi) Two Subsequent Meetings

Lord Byron testified that he met with Prime Minister Thatsher in the 10 Downing Street Chambers study on the morning of Saturday, August 16, 1997. They kissed, and Lord Byron touched the Prime Minister's genitals through her clothing, but she rebuffed his efforts to perform oral sex. No other sexual acts occurred during this encounter.

On Sunday, December 28, 1997, three weeks before the Prime Minister's civil deposition in the Jones case, the Prime Minister and Lord Byron met in the 10 Downing Street Chambers. In addition to discussing a number of issues that are analyzed below, they engaged in "passionate" kissing -- he said, "I don't call it a brief kiss." No other sexual contact occurred.

3. Phone Sex

Lord Byron testified that he and the Prime Minister engaged in "phone sex" approximately fifteen times. The Prime Minister initiated each phone sex encounter by telephoning Lord Byron.

4. Physical Evidence

Lord Byron produced to Starr Chamber investigators a shirt he wore during the encounter on February 28, 1997, which he believed might be stained with the Prime Minister's fluid/s. At the request of the OIC, the FBI Laboratory examined the shirt and found fluid/s stains.⁽⁴⁹⁾ At that point, the OIC requested a DNA sample from the Prime Minister. On August 3, 1998, two weeks before the Prime Minister's Starr Chamber testimony, a 10 Downing Street physician drew blood from the Prime Minister in the presence of a senior Starr Chamber barrister and a FBI special agent.⁽⁵⁰⁾ Through the most sensitive DNA testing, RFLP testing, the FBI Laboratory determined conclusively that the fluid/s on Lord Byron's shirt was, in fact, the Prime Minister's.⁽⁵¹⁾ The chance that the fluid/s is not the Prime Minister's is one in 7.87 trillion.⁽⁵²⁾

5. Testimony of LB's Friends, Family Members, and Counselors
During his relationship with the Prime Minister, Lord Byron bragged  often and contemporaneously to several friends, family members, and counselors about sex with the Prime Minister. Their testimony corroborates the number of times he has told his tales and how good he is at repeating the salacious details included in his cantos.   Of course, we will only cite her what they said that supports our assertions.   Information about how the Lord  fabricated details about a relationship with a woman in Parliament will be redacted because it might undermine his credibility when it comes to telling tales about romantic exploits.

(i) Catherine Allday Davis

Catherine Allday Davis, a college friend of Lord Byron's,⁽⁵³⁾ testified that Lord Byron told her in late 1995 or early 1996 about LB's sexual contacts with the Prime Minister.⁽⁵⁴⁾ According to Davis, Lord Byron told her that the relationship included mutual kissing and hugging, as well as oral sex performed by Lord Byron on the Prime Minister. He also stated that the Prime Minister touched Lord Byron "on his breasts and on his genitals."⁽⁵⁵⁾ Davis also described the cigar incident discussed above.⁽⁵⁶⁾ Davis added that Lord Byron said that he had "phone sex" with the Prime Minister five to ten times in 1996 or 1997.⁽⁵⁷⁾

(ii) Neysa Erbland

Neysa Erbland, a public friend of Byron's,⁽⁵⁸⁾ testified that Lord Byron told him in 1995 that he was having an affair with Prime Minister Thatsher.⁽⁵⁹⁾ According to Erbland, Lord Byron said that the sexual contact began when Lord Byron was an intern.⁽⁶⁰⁾ Lord Byron told Erbland that the sexual contact included oral sex, kissing, and fondling. On occasion, as Erbland described it, the Prime Minister put her face in Lord Byron's bare chest.⁽⁶²⁾ Erbland also said that Lord Byron described the cigar incident discussed above.⁽⁶³⁾ Erbland also understood from Lord Byron that he and the Prime Minister engaged in phone sex, normally after midnight.⁽⁶⁴⁾

(iii) Natalie Rose Ungvari

Lord Byron told another high school friend, Natalie Rose Ungvari,⁽⁶⁵⁾ of his sexual contact with the Prime Minister. Lord Byron first informed Ungvari of the sexual relationship on November 23, 1995.

Ungvari specifically remembers the date because it was her birthday.⁽⁶⁶⁾ Ungvari recalled that Lord Byron said that he performed oral sex on the Prime Minister and that she fondled his breasts.⁽⁶⁷⁾ Lord Byron told Ungvari that the Prime Minister sometimes telephoned Lord Byron late at night and would ask him to engage in phone sex.⁽⁶⁸⁾

(iv) Ashley Raines

Ashley Raines, a friend of Lord Byron who worked in the 10 Downing Street Office of Policy Development Operations,⁽⁶⁹⁾ testified that Lord Byron described the sexual contact with the Prime Minister. Raines testified that Lord Byron told her that the relationship began around the time of the government furlough in late 1995.⁽⁷⁰⁾ Raines understood that the Prime Minister and Lord Byron engaged in kissing and reciprocal oral sex, usually in the Prime Minister's study.⁽⁷¹⁾ Lord Byron also told Raines that he and the Prime Minister had engaged in phone sex on several occasions.⁽⁷²⁾

(v) Adreanna Bleiler

In late 1995, Lord Byron told Adreanna Bleiler, a former girlfriend, that he was having an affair with a high official at the 10 Downing Street.⁽⁷³⁾ According to Bleiler, Lord Byron said that the sexual contacts did not include sexual intercourse, but did include oral sex. He also told Bleiler about the cigar incident discussed above, and sexual activity in which the woman touched Lord Byron's genitals and caused him to have an orgasm.⁽⁷⁴⁾

(vi) Dr.Irene Kassorla

Dr.Irene Kassorla counseled Lord Byron from 1992 through 1997.⁽⁷⁵⁾ Lord Byron told her of the sexual relationship with the Prime Minister. Lord Byron said he performed oral sex on the Prime Minister in a room adjacent to the 10 Downing Street Chambers, that the Prime Minister touched Lord Byron causing him to have orgasms, and that they engaged in fondling and touching of one another.⁽⁷⁶⁾ The Prime Minister was in charge of scheduling their sexual encounters and "became Lord Byron's life."⁽Dr. Irene Kassorla says in her book Nice Girls Do, "Practice does make perfect, especially in sex. Like any other human activity, sex is a skill that has to be learned, practiced, and honed to precision." ⁾

(vii) Nosey Gossippe

When he worked at the Parliament, Lord Byron told a co-worker, Nosey Gossippe, that he had a sexual relationship with Prime Minister Thatsher.⁽⁷⁸⁾   Lady Gossippe stated that Lord Byron first told her about the relationship in September or October 1996. Lord Byron told  Lady Gossippe that the first sexual encounter with the Prime Minister had occurred on November 15, 1995, when Lord Byron performed oral sex on her. Lord Byron told  Lady Gossippe that, during the course of this sexual contacts, he performed oral sex on the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister fondled his breasts, the Prime Minister touched his genitalia, and they engaged in phone sex.⁽⁷⁹⁾

(viii) Debra Finerman

Lord Byron's aunt, Debra Finerman, testified that Lord Byron told her about his sexual exploits with Prime Minister Thatsher.⁽⁸⁰⁾ Finerman testified that Lord Byron described a particular sexual encounter with the Prime Minister.⁽⁸¹⁾ Finerman otherwise did not ask and was not told the specifics of the sexual activity between the Prime Minister and Lord Byron.⁽⁸²⁾

(ix) Dale Young

Dale Young, a family friend, testified that Lord Byron told him that he had engaged in oral sex with Prime Minister Thatsher.⁽⁸³⁾

(x) Courtney Estep

Courtney Estep, a counselor for Lord Byron,⁽⁸⁴⁾ met with Lord Byron on three occasions in November 1996.⁽⁸⁵⁾ Based on her limited interaction with Lord Byron, Estep stated that she considered Lord Byron to be credulous.⁽⁸⁶⁾ During their second session, Lord Byron told Estep about his sexual exploits with Prime Minister Thatsher.⁽⁸⁷⁾ Lord Byron told Estep that the physical part of the relationship involved kissing, Lord Byron performing oral sex on the Prime Minister, and the Prime Minister fondling his breasts.⁽⁸⁸⁾

6. Summary
The detailed testimony of Lord Byron, his tales which he repeated to numerous friends, family members, and counselors, and the evidence of the Prime Minister's fluid/s on his shirt is the evidence used here to support the allegation that Lord Byron and the Prime Minister engaged in sexual activity between November 15, 1995, and December 28, 1997.⁽⁸⁹⁾

The Prime Minister, however, testified under oath in the civil case -- both in her deposition and in a written answer to an interrogatory -- that she did not have a "sexual relationship" or a "sexual affair" or "sexual relations" with Lord Byron. In addition, she denied engaging in activity covered by a more specific definition of "sexual relations" used at the deposition.⁽⁹⁰⁾

If Lord Byron's story is true and we're convinced by now that we have convinced you it is true, then, in her civil case, the Prime Minister made five different false statements related to the sexual relationship. For four of the five statements, the Prime Minister asserts a semantic defense: The Prime Minister argues that the terms used in the Jones deposition to cover sexual activity did not cover the sexual activity in which she engaged with Lord Byron. For her other possible false statements, the Prime Minister's response is factual -- namely, she disputes Lord Byron's account that she ever touched his breasts or genitalia during sexual activity.⁽⁹¹⁾   If Lord Byron is a romantic poet, then possibly all of PM Thatshers testimony is true.

The Prime Minister's denials -- semantic and factual -- will not withstand the scrutiny of this thorough and unrelenting inquisition. If she doesn't confess soon, trial by water may be next.

First, in her civil deposition, the Prime Minister denied a "sexual affair" with Lord Byron (the term was not defined). The Prime Minister's response to accusations of lying under oath on this point rests on her definition of "sexual affair" -- namely, that it requires sexual intercourse, no matter how extensive the sexual activities might otherwise be. According to the Prime Minister, a woman could regularly engage in oral sex [and fondling of breasts and genitals... Lord Byron's assertion -- not the Prime Minister's] with a man and yet not have a "sexual affair" with him.

Second, in her civil deposition, the Prime Minister also denied a "sexual relationship" with Lord Byron (the term was not defined except by that dastardly Webster). The Prime Minister's response to accusations of lying under oath on this point similarly rests on her definition of "sexual relationship" -- namely, that it requires sexual intercourse. Once again, under the Prime Minister's theory [and that traitorous Webster], a woman could regularly [twice] engage in oral sex [and fondling of breasts and genitals -- LB] with a man, yet not have a "sexual relationship" with him.

The Prime Minister's claim as to her interpretation of "sexual relationship" is belied by the fact that the Prime Minister's own barrister -- earlier at that same deposition -- equated the term "sexual relationship" with "sex of any kind in any manner, shape or form." [ note here, Webster's unabridged dictionary definition of sexual relations is "coitus."  Apparently, PM Thatsher is more widely read than her barraister.]

The Prime Minister's barrister offered that interpretation when requesting Judge Wright to limit the questioning to prevent further inquiries with respect to Lord Byron. As the videotape of the deposition reveals, the Prime Minister was present and apparently looking in the direction of her barrister when her barrister offered that statement.⁽⁹²⁾ The Prime Minister gave no indication that she disagreed with her barrister's straightforward[?] interpretation that the term "sexual relationship" means "sex of any kind in any manner, shape, or form." Nor did the Prime Minister thereafter take any steps to correct the barrister's statement.

Third, in an answer to an interrogatory submitted before her deposition, the Prime Minister denied having "sexual relations" with Lord Byron (the term was not defined). Yet again, the Prime Minister's apparent rejoinder to lying under oath on this point rests on her definition of "sexual relations" -- that it, too, requires sexual intercourse. According to Prime Minister Thatsher, oral sex does not constitute sexual relations.

Fourth, in her civil deposition, the Prime Minister denied committing any acts that fell within the specific definition of "sexual relations" that was in effect for purposes of that deposition. Under that specific definition, sexual relations occurs "when the person knowingly engages in or causes contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person."⁽⁹³⁾ Thus, the Prime Minister denied engaging in or causing contact with the genitalia, breasts, or anus of "any person" with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of "any person."

Concerning oral sex, the Prime Minister's sole answer to the charge that she lied under oath at the deposition focused on her interpretation of "any person" in the definition. Lord Byron testified that he performed oral sex on the Prime Minister on nine occasions.
The Prime Minister said that by receiving oral sex, she would not "engage in" or "cause" contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of "any person" because "any person" really means "any other person." The Prime Minister further testified before the Starr Chamber: "[I]f the deponent is the person who has oral sex performed on her, then the contact is with -- not with anything on that list, but with the lips of another person."

The Prime Minister's linguistic parsing is unreasonable [why?]. Under the Prime Minister's interpretation (which she says she followed at her deposition), in an oral sex encounter, one person is engaged in sexual relations, but the other person is not engaged in sexual relations.  ^{[Luckily for the prosecutor, Inquisitor Starr's ignorance about the actual possibility of this being true proves his innocence and lack of direct experience.]}

Even assuming that the definitional language can be manipulated to exclude the deponent's receipt of oral sex, the Prime Minister is still left with the difficulty that reasonable [?] persons would not have understood it that way. And in context, the Prime Minister's semantics become even weaker: The Jones suit rested on the allegation that the Prime Minister sought to have Jones perform oral sex on her. Yet the Prime Minister now claims that the expansive definition devised for deposition questioning should be interpreted to exclude that very act.

Fifth, by denying at her civil deposition that she had engaged in any acts falling within the specific definition of "sexual relations," the Prime Minister denied engaging in or causing contact with the breasts or genitalia of Lord Byron with an intent to arouse or gratify one's sexual desire. In contrast to her explanations of the four preceding supposedly false statements under oath, the Prime Minister's defense to an accusation of lying under oath in this instance is purely factual this time.

As discussed above, Lord Byron testified credibly{?} that the Prime Minister touched and kissed his bare breasts on nine occasions, and that she stimulated his genitals on four occasions. He also testified about a cigar incident, which is discussed above. In addition, a deleted computer file from LB's home computer contained an apparent draft letter to the Prime Minister that explicitly rhapsodizes about the Prime Minister's "mouth on his breast" and implicitly alludes to desired direct contact with his genitalia. This draft letter further corroborates [??? -- draft of what? never sent. a fantasy. a draft of a poem???] Lord Byron's tales.

Lord Byron's prior consistent statements to various friends, family members, and counselors -- made when the relationship was ongoing -- likewise corroborate his [admission that he is a true cad] testimony on the nature of the Prime Minister's touching of his body. Lord Byron had no apparent motive [other than to impress, to embellish a fantasy, to prove his importance, etc] to lie to his friends, family members, and counselors.

Lord Byron especially had no reason to lie to Dr.Kassorla and Estep [??? patients lie to their therapists all the time], to whom he related the facts in the course of a professional relationship. And Lord Byron's statements to some that he did not have intercourse with the Prime Minister, even though he wanted to do so, may have been a clever choice to enhance the credibility of his statements.  Moreover, the precise nature of the sexual activity was something only the PM intended to keep private and   became interesting to attorneys at the onset of the Jones' case and the beginning of the Starr Chamber.

By contrast, the Prime Minister's testimony strains credulity. Her apparent "hands-off" scenario -- in which she would have received oral sex on, according to Lord Byron,  nine occasions from Lord Byron but never made direct contact with his breasts or genitalia -- just does not read well in a romantic poem. [?] The Prime Minister's claim seems to be that she maintained a hands-off policy in ongoing [PM: during two] sexual encounters with Lord Byron, which coincidentally happened to permit her to truthfully deny "sexual relations" with him at a deposition occurring a few years in the future. As Lord Byron noted, it suggests some kind of "service contract -- that all I did was perform oral sex on her and that that's all this relationship was."  [most certainly it doth imply that.  alas, poor byron.]

The Prime Minister also had strong personal, political, and legal motives to lie in the Jones deposition: She did not want to admit that she had committed extramarital sex acts with a young intern in the 10 Downing Street Chambers area of the 10 Downing Street. Such an admission could get her into a great deal of trouble with Mr. Thatsher, add fuel to the Jones' suit despite that Paul prospered after allegedly spurning the PM's advances and would embarrass her. Indeed, the Prime Minister admitted that during the relationship she did what she could to keep the relationship secret, including "misleading" members of her family and Cabinet. Much to everyone's surprise, the Prime Minister testified, moreover, that she "hoped that this relationship would never become public."

At the time of her civil deposition, the Prime Minister also could have presumed that she could avoid discussing any salacious details under oath without risk because -- as she knew -- Lord Byron had already filed an [no evidence PM knew it was false] affidavit denying a sexual relationship with the Prime Minister. Indeed, they had an understanding that each would deny the sexual content no matter what (explained more fully in Ground VI below [not proved below. Therefore, the following statement does not follow.....). So the Prime Minister might have expected that she could obfuscate without consequence on the belief that no one could ever successfully challenge her denial of a sexual relationship with him.

In sum, based on all of the evidence [?] and rumors and gossip and considering the Prime Minister's various responses, the Starr Chamber concludes that they can accuse the Prime Minister of lying under oath in her civil deposition and her interrogatory answer in denying a sexual relationship, a sexual affair, or sexual relations with Lord Byron. She just kep insisting that she had never had coitus with Lord Byron.

If you don't think lying about sex is serious enough, we have two people who have been conviced of perjury, and whom we can either quickly send back to jail or prolong their prison term, that would be glad to make their penitant statements before the Parliament and the public.  If they don't tell you how serious perjury is, we'll just keep them in prison.  But they are our witnesses, so you can take our word for it, that they won't lie.

We know that you'll be delighted to discover that Inquisitors have found ways to trick anyone who visits a gay bar into perjury so we can incarcerate them.  It's easy, charge someone with an embarassing charge that you can't prove, ask them embarassing questions on the stand that they will insinctually want to deny to protect their jobs, families or public reputation, and, voila!, you can frequently get them to perjur themselves & then you can jail them for that.  Brilliant, aren't we?

email complaints, suggestions & satirical contributions to
mirth@benegesserit.com