Hypothetical Question.....

[hammerman]

Could anyone who pleaded not guilty in court, and then subsequently found guilty by jury, then also be prosecuted for perjury having lied under oath to try to get off ?

[Peter Pedant]

no - old one
we had a mad barrister teaching us Latin when I was 9

all not guilty means - is prove the case strictly
we learnt some Law but not much latin

Perjury is governed ( that is the q answered so I am gonna ramble now) by the Perjury Act 1906 and has met the test of time - unlike lets say the Pensions Act or the Charities Act ( 5 during the nineties ). Very little case law - it appears to be straightforward. You need an independent witness for the perjured act - that is someone other than your accuser has to see you do the act you are denying - so perverting the course of justice or conspiracy to do so is a better deal ( for the crown that is)

The other side of the coin is 'witness immunity' - I think that comes up in Crawford v Jones which is mainly about DIY lawyers ( litigants in person) where the witness is immune from suit besides perjury, conspiracy ( and a third - ? malicious falsehood )

One of my tenants has alleged to a court that I put her married name on a lease in order to defraud the authorities, ( inter alia I think they say ) - the forgetful lady didnt check to see if it were really her maiden name ( it was ). There is absolutely nothing I can do about this besides disprove it in court. Apparently I should be grateful I am able to prove my innocence !

There's British Justice for you !

Perjury is only a crime and not a tort - you cant sue someone for damages for injuries done by sworn evidence. Oh and you cant murder by perjury either - I think that is R v McHugh 1748

[Peter Pedant]

one of DLT's accusers over which he was acquitted has been on tee-vee putting the high heeled shoe in. She will be relying on the fact that her testimony is not suable so basically DLY cant do much about it