Alice Martin Perjury Update | Harper's Magazine

Sign in to access Harper’s Magazine

Need to create a login? Want to change your email address or password? Forgot your password?

  1. Sign in to Customer Care using your account number or postal address.
  2. Select Email/Password Information.
  3. Enter your new information and click on Save My Changes.

Locked out of your account? Get help here.

Subscribers can find additional help here.

Not a subscriber? Subscribe today!

Get Access to Print and Digital for $23.99.
Subscribe for Full Access
Get Access to Print and Digital for $23.99.
[No Comment]

Alice Martin Perjury Update


Readers of No Comment are no doubt familiar with the name Alice Martin. As the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama, she has figured prominently in a number of posts over the last year, in particular “The Alice Martin Perjury Investigation.” On April 15, 2008, Martin contacted Harper’s Magazine with the information that the Justice Department’s Office of Personal Responsibility had cleared her of charges that she committed perjury in a deposition stemming from a wrongful dismissal case brought by a former employee, Deirdre Brown (now Deirdre Fleming).

Martin explained that she had the previous day signed a privacy waiver permitting the OPR to provide information about her case to the press.

Harper’s contacted the OPR, which refused to discuss the case over the telephone. In response to a written inquiry, Associate Counsel James G. Duncan confirmed in writing [Download PDF] that the perjury investigation against Martin had been concluded on November 28, 2007, though he declined to provide details about the scope of the investigation, its findings, or the legal reasoning that led to the decision.

Other questions for the OPR remain unanswered:

  • Why wasn’t Brown interviewed by OPR as part of the investigation? (While Ms. Brown’s name was redacted by the Justice Department, she has not sought confidentiality; she has spoken with me and others in the media about the matter.)
  • Why did the OPR reject the conclusion of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s proceedings on Brown’s claim, which found that Martin’s testimony was “not worthy of credence”?
  • Why, given that an email [Download PDF] was sent to Martin on March 18, 2002, to inform her on matters involving Brown, did the OPR not accept this email as documentary evidence to support the concerns about Martin’s testimony?

More from