Sussmann was guilty as hell. That said, it should not be a crime to lie to the FBI. It’s just an easy way to get a conviction when there really is no other evidence of other crimes.
When someone is interviewed by the FBI, there is no recording or video made of the interview. Usually citizens do have a their own legal counsel present. The FBI agents write up the official notes of the interview and historically courts have accepted those notes and recollections as the “truth”. When comparing the recollections of the FBI agent to the recollections of the defendant, the presumption of innocence goes out the window and the court assumes the FBI’s version is the the truth, even without corroborating evidence.
There have been enough instances publicized in recent years where FBI agents or supervisors edited or changed field interview notes to made the subject of the interview appear innocent or in other cases guilty. There is enough doubt in my mind as to honesty and fairness of FBI agents today that I would not submit to an FBI interview without my attorney present and a video camera rolling.
As a result of the behavior of the FBI, were I sitting on a jury I would be very skeptical of FBI interview notes unless the substance of the notes could be verified with other evidence. If the FBI notes are the only evidence of the defendant lying, and the FBI has a well deserved reputation itself for lying and falsifying information, it would be hard for me as a juror to convict someone of “lying to the FBI” without corroborating evidence that didn’t originate with the FBI.
It is sad that a once respected federal law enforcement agency has through its own actions shown it is more concerned with manufacturing “evidence” for a specific outcome than being objective and always supporting the truth.
Sussmann, as a US citizen deserves the same presumption of innocence as any other indicted citizen. If the FBI lied about Flynn, the FBI could have lied about Sussmann.