0

Just to pretext, this question was inspired by a scene in Suits. I know that Suits is not a particularly accurate representation of the legal system, I'm just curious about the legality of a similar scenario in the real world.

During a case, Harvey aquires evidence, in the form of a recorded phone call, that the opposing counsel, Tanner, had facilitated witness tampering. Tanner correctly points out that he could not have gotten that evidence legally and so Harvey proceeds to hold up an affidavit and states he'll testify that he was just given it anonymously (he wasn't, so that would perjury).

I'm wondering, has Harvey committed a crime by threatening to commit perjury? If so, would it make a difference if he could prove he never intended to commit perjury e.g. the affidavit he showed Tanner was fake but he just didn't check it?

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .