Tara Reade, Joe Biden’s accuser, apparently testified for years as an expert witness in domestic violence cases. In doing so, Reade may have given false testimony about her credentials. She may have testified falsely that she has a bachelor’s degree from Antioch University in Seattle and that she never took the California bar exam (it seems she took that exam and failed it). She may also have exaggerated her duties as a staffer to Joe Biden.
According to Politico, the Monterey County District Attorney’s office is investigating whether, in fact, Reade lied on the witness stand as an expert witness.
I have a few observations about this development. The first is the most obvious. If Reade testified falsely to any material matter, she should face the legal consequences of doing so.
Second, giving false testimony under oath about her credentials (if that’s what happened) bears on Reade’s credibility as Biden’s accuser. It’s not dispositive, though. Reade accused Biden of sexual misconduct during the 1990s and had no financial incentive to lie about this at the time. Any false testimony she gave in sexual assault cases occurred many years later when she had a financial incentive to embellish her resume — to sustain her career as an expert witness.
Third, based on my experience litigating employment discrimination claims, I can say that if resume enhancement were a basis for finding such claims false, at least half of these claims would fail on that ground. It always amazed me how much lying occurred on resumes. However, plaintiffs would tell the truth about their background under oath, more often than not.
Fourth, I doubt that “expert testimony” of the nature Reade was found qualified to give has any value in domestic violence cases. My experience is that it has none in sex harassment cases. The common sense and life experiences of jurors are all that’s required to render judgement in these matters. It’s telling that someone like Reade (as she is now) made money in this field of pseudo-expertise.