down with memory lane!

By Diogenes ( articles ) | Mar 22, 2003

A puzzling sentence from an earlier story in the Boston Herald:

Bernard Cardinal Law's attorney moved yesterday to put off Law's testimony in a civil case until after the cardinal goes before a criminal grand jury next month, explaining after that he fears Law might "inadvertently contradict" himself and open himself to a perjury charge.

Please, teacher, could you please explain why, if the Cardinal's anticipated contradictions would be inadvertent, what purpose is served by delaying his testimony before the grand jury?