Legal Definitions - praevaricatio

Praevaricatio

Praevaricatio is a term originating from Roman law that describes a specific form of misconduct by an accuser. It refers to the act where an accuser, instead of genuinely pursuing a case against a defendant, secretly colludes with the defense. The purpose of this collusion is to deliberately weaken the prosecution's or plaintiff's case, thereby ensuring that the accused individual is acquitted or receives a favorable outcome. Essentially, it's a betrayal of the accuser's duty to present a strong, honest case, done in bad faith to benefit the opposing party.

• Imagine a criminal trial where a prosecutor is assigned to a complex fraud case. Unbeknownst to the court or the public, the prosecutor has a secret agreement with the defense attorney. During the trial, the prosecutor intentionally presents key evidence in a confusing manner, asks leading questions that allow defense witnesses to easily deflect, and refrains from introducing crucial financial documents that would undeniably prove the defendant's guilt. This deliberate sabotage of the prosecution's own case, aimed at securing an acquittal for the defendant, would be an act of praevaricatio.

• Consider a civil lawsuit where a company is suing a former employee for theft of trade secrets. The company's lead attorney, who has a hidden financial interest with the former employee, deliberately fails to subpoena critical digital records that would clearly show the employee downloading proprietary information. Furthermore, the attorney neglects to call expert witnesses who could testify to the value and uniqueness of the stolen secrets. By intentionally undermining their own client's case to benefit the defendant, the attorney would be engaging in praevaricatio.

• In a regulatory investigation, suppose a government agency is pursuing charges against a pharmaceutical company for misleading advertising. The lead investigator, secretly influenced by the company, writes a report that downplays the severity of the company's claims, omits interviews with consumers who suffered adverse effects, and fails to recommend the maximum allowable penalties. This intentional weakening of the agency's case against the company, designed to ensure a lighter punishment or no finding of wrongdoing, exemplifies praevaricatio.