It's going to take awhile, I think. Regardless of the ruling on defens motions for deiscovery, either side is apt to appeal.
I've been looking for cites to cases where a perjury conviction stood, with "no underlying crime." The runaway bride story (Wilbanks) came to mind. Running away isn't criminal, so how could lying about it be?
And in Clinton's civil case with Jones, where Jones sought to introduce Lewinski. AN affair with Lewinski isn't a crime, so how can lying about it be?
The government need not prove the legitimacy of the grand jury's investigation which led to the testimony, only the pertinence of the particular testimony to the grand jury's investigation. United States v. Regan, 103 F.3d 1072 (2d Cir. 1997)http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm01748.htm
Furthermore, testimony may be material even if it relates to events as to which the statute of limitations has run, since the grand jury may have legitimate reasons to inquire about such events aside from an expectation of returning an indictment charging those events as crimes. United States v. Chen, 933 F.2d 793, 797 (9th Cir. 1991); United States v. Nazzaro, 889 F.2d 1158, 1165-66 (1st Cir. 1989).http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm01748.htm
Was she convicted of perjury? Or filing a false report CLAIMING a crime?
An affair with Lewinski wherin he uses his office to benefit her for engaging in sexual activities with him is certainly illegal - and the accusation that he did this (and its converse of punishing those who did not comply) as a pattern of behavior was the basis for the lawsuit.