Advertisement
"I'm not at liberty to discuss the details of the incident right now becuase the case is still pending."
What's the story on this?
Who is and who isn't allowed to speak about an ongoing case?
Can the victims speak? What about the witnesses?
posted by:
|
SF Bay Area
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Case pending - cannot speak
Fri, October 19, 2007 - 12:34 PMA judge *can* order the parties and the attorneys to not discuss a case. It is actually pretty rare, tho.
Usually, people invoke the "I'm not at liberty to say..." as a fancy way of saying, "No comment." If a case is pending, nothing good (from a litigation standpoint) will come from speaking out. From a PR standpoint, however, there are times when speaking out is helpful.
So people shutting up is usually based on the advice of counsel, and not under the threat of some governmental order. -
-
Re: Case pending - cannot speak
Fri, October 19, 2007 - 2:35 PMI'm not a lawyer yet (C'mon, July Bar), but I understand that people and attorneys might not want to make comments regarding a case since it could damage their ability to keep information confidential, have repercussions regarding a trial and jury selection, or just give the other side more ammunition to use against the commenter. Weazie right, although people don't seem to follow good advice like that as often as they probably should. -
-
Re: Case pending - cannot speak
Tue, October 30, 2007 - 3:08 PMHaving just read the thread that prompted you to ask this (and then quoted me), I'll add the additional caveat of a statutory or ethical duty not to speak.
It is possible there is a statute, regulation, or policy that prevents someone from speaking about a particular subject. For example, as we learned from the Scooter Libby affair, disclosing the name of a covert CIA operative is a crime. (So it is possible that emergency service personnel such as police officers and fire fighters are not allowed to discuss ongoing cases.)
Many professions (lawyers, doctors, priests, etc.) have an ethical duty not to disclose confidences. There's no legal obligation to prevent someone from breaking that confidence, but doing so may jeapordize their continued ability to practice that profession. -
-
Re: Case pending - cannot speak
Tue, October 30, 2007 - 5:13 PMWeazie:
> Many professions (lawyers, doctors, priests, etc.) have an ethical duty not to disclose confidences. There's no legal obligation to prevent someone from breaking that confidence, but doing so may jeapordize their continued ability to practice that profession.
All agreed. But in this particular case, the person said that he would not comment _while the case is pending_. That certainly implies that it's a legal question, not a matter of ethics for his profession.
We'll just see if he ever gets around to sharing the reason why he thinks that he cannot speak. -
-
Re: Case pending - cannot speak
Tue, October 30, 2007 - 5:29 PMWhile this particular person's answer did imply that it wasn't an ethical issue, I was answering the question generally.
And note that "Tristan" has used the same excuse ("pending case") as to why he cannot comment more about Paul's latest (alledged) stunt. Will you be holding him to the same standard? -
-
Re: Case pending - cannot speak
Tue, October 30, 2007 - 9:55 PMJoseph works for BMORG. Its lawyer, the Pershing County DA, or his own personal lawyer may have advised him to not discuss that case in public. Or BMORG (not on counsel's advice) may have ordered its employees not to talk. Or he may have come to that conclusion on his own. I would guess that Joseph fears he will lose his job at BMORG if he speaks.
Tristan, OTOH, simply says he has heard things from witnesses to events surrounding Paul's latest arrest. He's copping a more classic "no comment" attitude, as I doubt any lawyer has advised him to hush. I would guess Tristan doesn't want to accidentally implicate Paul or anyone else (with empahsis on anyone else) any further.
-
-
-
-
-
