Attorney Reid Weingarten discusses jury selection strategy in BP Gulf litigation

White Collar Titan Reid Weingarten on Juries Clients and the Scariest Federal Prosecutor... Page 3 of 5 much oil was coming out of the hole after the explosion. BP had pleaded guilty to the very same conduct and paid $4 billion. That was not a positive piece. | was told by everybody that BP was loathed in New Orleans. So now | have to pick a jury in New Orleans for the very same conduct the company pleaded guilty to. And BP had paid a zillion dollars to every fisherman and stripper in New Orleans who claimed the spill prevented them from earning a living. But now, BP was getting pissed off that they were getting ripped off, and were pulling back. In addition to being hated for killing all the pelicans and ruining tourism and fishing, now they’re pulling back on their largesse. So | have to pick a jury. We had all the consultants you can imagine. The common wisdom was, don’t pick anybody close to the gulf, because anyone close to the explosion will hate BP, and don’t take African-Americans because they hate fancy white lawyers from Washington, blah blah blah. | picked a jury and | did exactly the opposite, because my gut was that a sophisticated person near the water who is familiar with the industry will appreciate how difficult it is to drill these wells. If you have 100 deep sea wells in the gulf, every once in a while, you’re going to have an accident. And there’s no reason to assume that the rest of the population, no matter what their background or color, wouldn’t strive to be fair. | also thought | had the upper hand in that | didn’t think my client was guilty of anything, so | went against the grain. You have standard thinking among most defense counsel on jury selection, and this is an instance where | threw it out, and the jury came back in about two seconds and acquitted. | was lucky and right. It’s interesting to see who wants the smart jurors. Sometimes prosecutors want the smart jurors, sometimes | want the smart jurors. That is an indication of who thinks they have the righteous case. When prosecutors are striking all the lawyers and accountants and college- educated people, and—in New York City this happens—they want doormen and bus drivers, what they want is to rely on visceral hatred for the target and also a visceral reliance on Uncle Sam, as opposed to the facts. When that happens, | want to blow my brains out, because that’s not how prosecutors should behave. Prosecutors always should have the righteous case, and it should only be crafty defense attorneys who want to obscure the facts. When | want the smart jurors because | think | have a righteous case, that case never should have been brought. These days | find that to be the case many times. LD: How do you prepare for court? Do you rehearse what you’re going to say? RW: | can’t prepare that way. There are clients who say, "| want to hear your opening before you make it." | say, "Get another lawyer." This is not good or bad, it’s just Reid. | can’t say the same thing twice, and | cannot read a speech. It’s not how | work with information. http://www litigationdaily.com/printerfriendly/id=1202736534962 9/8/2015 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023104