You’re reading someone who’s got most of his legal “knowledge” from Law & Order, and even my question is about an episode tonight, It’s about knowingly allowing a witness to perjure himself.
The background facts:
There is a murder. A witness for the prosecution testifies, but the jury cannot reach a verdict and a mistrial is declared.
A second jury is empanelled and as the 2nd trial is about to begin, the prosecutors and witness meet outside of court to review the upcoming testimony. During this run-through, the witness embellishes his story with an additional claim that the prosecution soon knew was a lie. He said he saw the murder weapon in the suspect’s room a week ahead of the murder, when it had actually been bought the day before.
The next day in court McCoy asked a question to elicit the lie, walked back to his chair and basically gave a high-dign to the defense attorney by whispering, “You owe me one” to her. She broke the witness on the stand and it becomes clear that he is the killer.
There was no prolinged discussion about WHY pursue this tactic, as it didn;t really prove anything but would probably completely undermine his testimny.
Is this a legally or ethically justifiable tactic? And I’m not talking about personal ethics, I’m talking about whatever codes they are bound to as members of the court and bar.