Tainting Tiger (Update)

The initial reaction to the Tiger crash was a great joke :  So what club did she use?  Yeah, I laughed at that one too.

But a couple of days later, a few missed meetings with the cops, and suddenly it’s not so funny.  Why?  Because Tiger has  a criminal defense lawyer, Mark Nejame.  This makes him a bad Tiger?

As Miami criminal defense lawyer Brian Tannebaum speculated, it was likely that Tiger was being advised by his regular lawyers, not to mention his flack, his housekeeper and an assortment of golf pros, about what to do with the cop before it dawned on one or more of these learned folks that they didn’t have a clue what they were talking about.  Not that this stops a lawyer from giving advice, but the best minds in a room of clueless people is hardly a substitute for one knowledgeable person.

Since this was all about how to deal with the police, it was only natural that the right type of lawyer for such advice would be a criminal defense lawyer.  And it only took a few days for his regular guys to come up with the idea.  And so Tiger’s now been informed that he’s under no duty to speak to police.  As in, when they ask you to come in, have your lawyer say, “thank you, but no.”  That’s all the advice he needs, for now at least.

But why is it that by dint of going to a lawyer whose practice is in a niche that renders him competent to give advice on the subject of how best to address the police, Tiger has become tainted? 

It’s much like going to a psychiatrist, even though people want to pretend that it’s not.  The mere fact that you need the help of a mental health professional carried a stigma; you were nuts.  It’s politically incorrect to still think this, though most people still do.  To avoid this stigma, nutty people refuse to go see a shrink, as if everyone around them hasn’t already noticed that they’re nuts.

Being represented by a criminal defense lawyer carries a similar stigma.  If you didn’t do something wrong, why would you need a criminal defense lawyer?  Of course, if you have nothing to hide, why won’t you let cops search your car?  It’s a great game to play, but also one with both an obvious answer and a dangerous downside.  You consult with a criminal defense lawyer because your civil lawyer doesn’t have a clue what to do, is inclined to do the worst possible thing because of the combination of fear and ignorance, and doesn’t want to lose the opportunity to get his name in the paper and another decent fee.

Criminal defense lawyers deal with police.  We know what people are obliged to do as well as what they need not do.  The police, who want nothing more than to question anybody that interests them, are not a fine source of advice, any more than the civil lawyers.  I can’t remember how many times defendants told me that they asked the cops during the interrogation whether they should have a lawyer present. Somehow, the cops never think it’s necessary.

Even worse than the civil lawyer is the flack, whose only concern is how things will play out in the media.  “But it won’t look good for you if you don’t meet with the police, Tig.”  And it won’t look good if he’s arrested based on his statements to the police either, but the latter will go on much longer than the former.  Flacks tend to be more concerned with appearance than reality. 

Tiger Woods makes a darn good living, and can afford to get some decent legal advice.  Whether he’s chosen his advisers wisely is beyond me, as I’ve known some very wealthy people who listen to some very bad advice.  But that aside, turning to a criminal defense lawyer for advice on how to deal with questioning by police is not only a good decision, but the only one that would potentially provide him with the information necessary to make a reasoned decision.  If he had asked me, I would have told him that there was absolutely nothing to be gained by speaking to the police.  Don’t do it.

For those who believe that having a criminal defense lawyer somehow makes Tiger look “guilty” of something, remember that his choices were limited to a bunch of legal advisers who lacked the competency to help or a criminal defense lawyer, the only practice area that could provide him with sound, competent legal advice.  It doesn’t mean his “guilty” of anything except good judgment.

Update:  By way of contrast, White House party crashers Michaele and Tareq Salahi have retained counsel too.  Their choice, however, isn’t a criminal defense lawyers, but an entertainment lawyer, Paul Gardner.  Who made the better choice?  Time will tell.


Discover more from Simple Justice

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

7 thoughts on “Tainting Tiger (Update)

  1. Turk

    Flacks tend to be more concerned with appearance than reality.

    Except that mult-million dollar endorsement deals are also a reality. Just a different kind.

    While Tiger needs the advice of the criminal defense lawyer — Do I have to talk to the cops? Do they have probable cause to look at my medical records trying to investigate domestic violence? Are they allowed to treat me differently than Joe Blow? — the crim defense atty shouldn’t just ignore the flak. There is too much at stake in the way of money.

    The lawyer may choose to ignore the advice of the flak — liberty takes precedence over money — but that doesn’t mean the flak is unimportant in the mix.

  2. SHG

    You’re missing the point: No one said that the flacks don’t have their place, but that place isn’t giving legal advice about how to deal with the police.  Nor is it the lawyer’s role to heed the flack’s advice; that’s for the client to decide.  The lawyer’s role is to provide competent, accurate legal advice.  The flack’s role is to provide advice in handling the media.  It’s up to the client to decide whether he’s prepared to risk prosecution in order to preserve his transitory image.

Comments are closed.