No, that is not a lie.
At least, it may be a lie but that isn't the only possibility.
It might well just be a mistake.
Or it might be true to the extent of his knowledge at the time of the assertion.
They are perfectly entitled to bring fresh charges to better reflect the evidence anyway.
Sorry if that is bad news.
Can I clarify anything for you?
That doesn't mean he has read it.
I'm afraid this is just not only a lie. There are other explanations.
I can do a call later today. I'm back in Court at 2pm so can't really call now.
In any event, calling something that is, in fact, old new is not really something worthy of dishonesty. It doesn't make any difference whether it is new or old.
Not necessarily. It could be just a misdescription
Yes, this is not necessarily a lie.
This is the type of thing that over stretching prosecution authorities do all the time.
There is no point in lying. They are free to bring new charges.