Communication Tools

Talk to a businessperson who’s about to go to jail and you are likely to learn a few painful lessons about high-stakes litigation. You may hear about a zealous prosecutor who freely played the media while the defense intoned “no comment” every time. You may hear about a corporation with reason to covertly abet the prosecution, or an NGO that leaked information while the defense side didn’t even know that it was supposed to have a leak strategy. You may hear about a whistleblower who was mishandled until the crisis mushroomed out of control.

Communications campaigns during high-stakes litigation happen before the trial, to level the playing field and influence jury pools. They happen during the trial to assure fair reporting. And, in high-stakes litigation, they happen after the trial to rehabilitate reputations or leverage success.

Lawyers don’t like to openly acknowledge it, but the fact is that judges and juries read the newspapers. Especially with high-stakes litigation, they are affected by what they read. Richard Schrushy spent a lot of time on television before his criminal trial in Alabama – for him as high-stakes as high-stakes litigation can get – delivering the right messages to the right audiences. The result was a jury clearly disposed to decide in favor of acquittal.

After trial, the stakes can still be high. Reputations are still at risk. In Martha Stewart’s high-stakes litigation, the communications effort was bungled during trial. Afterward, the momentum shifted toward a speedy and thorough rehabilitation of both her personal reputation and her business. High-stakes litigation is a long-haul proposition and the communications strategy must be long-haul as well.