Lance Armstrong was America's most famous cyclist. He won the Tour de France seven times. The feat was remarkable, to say the least. Indeed, it was so remarkable that he was widely suspected of doping. For years, he adamantly if not snarlingly denied that he had done any such thing. He pointed the the fact that he had taken dozens of doping tests and passed all of them.
It was all a pack of lies. He was doping all along. He had devised a method to scam the testing. Eventually the mass of evidence against him was so overwhelming that he was stripped of his victories and banned from competitive cycling for life.
Q: What to do? A: What else? Go on Oprah Winfrey to "confess."
The Armstrong case and his decision to give an interview to Oprah (who to the best of my knowledge knows zip about cycling) tells us something. It's not directly about criminal law (not yet, anyway, although who knows what criminal fraud cases lie ahead. Armstrong made a great deal of money by cheating).
What it tells us is that we live in a culture of deceit that gets hugged and sobbed over on Oprah Winfrey, but not punished. I have posted about this before, albeit in a different context.
The successful operation of our courts depends, at bottom, on a culture that condemns -- I mean actually condemns -- lying. This one doesn't. The amount of lying that goes on every day and in every medium is astounding, but attempting to hold liars accountable is snoozingly dismissed as old-fashioned, Puritanical hectoring.
Made-up Constitutional doctrine like the "analyses" in Miranda and Lafler represent a threat to the criminal justice system, but nothing compared to a culture that shrugs its shoulders at lying.