A northern Indiana attorney says he has released portions of the deposition with a member of the band Sugarland to counter
what he believes to be inaccurate press releases from the band. But is it a good idea for an attorney to be releasing this
information to the press before the matter has gone to trial?
Sugarland band members Jennifer Nettles and Kristian Bush are being deposed about what they know regarding decisions on whether
to postpone their concert at the Indiana State Fair Aug. 13, 2011, due to incoming bad weather. Attorney Ken Allen of Merrillville,
who is representing victims in the stage collapse, handed over some of the recorded deposition of Nettles to the press.
According to news outlets in Indianapolis, he says he’s done so to combat inaccurate information coming from Sugarland
representatives. He’s also spoken to the press about the depositions, claiming testimony was “cold and calculated.”
Of course, Sugarland’s spokesman Allan Mayer is bothered that Allen has released the depositions, telling CNN, “When
you think about it, you can’t really blame these lawyers for attempting to try their case in the press, because if they
tried to make those arguments in court, they’d quickly be tossed in the trash, which is where they belong.”
Mayer also claims that the deposition has been selectively edited.
Tell me, attorneys, is releasing portions of a deposition good trial strategy? Is this tactic something that is common in
these types of cases? Would it compromise your case in court to release it to the press before hand?








Conversations
4 Comments
Add Comment
The press reporting on the matter is no better. Sugarland was attacked in the press for "blaming the fans" based on its answer to Complaints in which it simply raised comparative fault - which is the law and they have a right to assert all available defenses.
At the same time lawyers should save it for the courtroom, and avoid sensational press battles. Generally it seems like a waste of effort and time doing something less productive than a lot of other things that could be done.
I think its the mark of a superior lawyer who keeps a sensational matter OUT OF THE PRESS. Whenever I see a lawyer avoid commenting to reporters, I think, "class act;" whenever I see a press conference, I think "showman."
And I apply that same thought to prosecutors, who also should avoid the sensational press conferences and commentary wholly, ahead of the verdict.