John Browne may now face charges of perjury

BBC says,
"Former BP chief Lord John Browne may now face charges of perjury amid allegations that he lied to a court about a gay partner, reports say.
Lord Browne quit on Tuesday after the Mail on Sunday won a court battle to print details of his private life.

He also apologised that legal statements he made about a relationship with Jeff Chevalier were "untruthful".

The newspaper said it would be handing its "evidence" against him to the Attorney General for investigation.

Lord Browne's 41-year career at BP came to an abrupt end on Tuesday when it emerged that he had lied in court over how he met his former lover, Jeff Chevalier.

Lord Browne had testified that they had met while exercising in Battersea Park, a statement he has now admitted was false.

'Misleading and erroneous'

As well as fighting to prevent revelations about his private life being made public by Mail on Sunday owner Associated Press, he was also battling against allegations he had used BP resources to help Mr Chevalier.

Lord Browne has always denied the claims.

"These allegations are full of misleading and erroneous claims. In particular, I deny categorically any allegations of improper conduct relating to BP," he said in a statement on Tuesday.

BP has also said the allegations about misuse of company resources are unfounded.

His decision to quit after 10 years at the helm of the company will cost him at least £3m and potentially as much as £15m. "

Having just read the autobiograhies of Aitken and Archer, justice it seems demands that Browne have his day on a perjury charge too. One cannot though but notice how sympathetic the media are to Browne. With the two politicians the press bayed for blood.

Melanie Philips is of the same mind as this from her diary shows.

Now there are calls for Browne to be prosecuted for perjury. Yet this is how Matthew Parris in the Times views such behaviour:


He is not the first and will hardly be the last to be overcome by momentary embarrassment when challenged to disclose how a relationship started, and (no doubt asking himself what business it was of other people anyway) answer untruthfully in haste, then repent of his dishonesty at leisure. It was silly - no more. 'Perjury?' Fiddlesticks. Whatever the press may claim, there is no scandal hereŠ What this story is really about is the awkardness of gay sex in the business world and our general fascination with the lives of the rich and (in Lord Browne's case) slightly famous.

What extraordinary insouciance towards dishonesty in court. And what a spectacular misrepresentation of the cause of Lord Browne's downfall. That noise you can hear is the rumbling of an agenda that drives all before it. It is not a pretty sound.