Chris Huhne, another person in the news this week, resigned from the UK cabinet in 2012 after being charged with perverting the course of justice. He'd persuaded his then-wife to accept penalty points for speeding, when, in fact, he had been driving. Huhne later admitted to lying and consequently served 62 days of an 8 month prison sentence.
In my opinion, both men abused their relationships by coaxing their partners to lie. Neither man faced up to the truth and both thought that, by lying, they could deflect any blame from themselves. It was unfair to put the pressure on their loved ones to commit perjury, seemingly because they thought themselves more important. They probably felt that, in their position, they were untouchable, so persuaded their pliant partners to lie.
When is a lie acceptable? Certainly, there are times when a 'white lie' is told, so as to spare someone's feelings. Telling someone they look great, when in reality you're not so sure, can bolster their confidence and does no harm. Similarly, a lie to a child may solve an issue and placate them. Father Christmas, for example, is a wonderful fantasy for them and we prolong the myth as long as possible. We've all done it.
What's different is when a lie has a detrimental effect, or when it breaks the law, thus affecting social standards. We strive to live by a moral code and know the difference between right and wrong. If we choose to do wrong, we shouldn't implicate others, particularly if they're emotionally involved with us so would find it harder to say 'no'; it would be disrespectful to them and put into question whether they could trust us in the future.
Armstrong and Huhne deserve no sympathy for their decisions to flout the law. They persuaded they're partners to lie for them, and in doing so revealed their own true colours, which are somewhat murky and undesirable, and that's no lie.