Or it's possible that they want you to believe this?
I find it strange that both of the Preston-Werners posted blog posts directly after the github post came out. Usually I'd think lawyers would not encourage this...
Most attorneys will advise clients not to make public statements until a matter has been resolved formally. Where appropriate, public statements are generally very direct and avoid detail.
I am skeptical that an attorney blessed statements like "we were fully cleared of all accusations of harassment" and "we learned that, despite, being found not guilty of the harassment accusations." These statements, particularly "found not guilty", would be appropriate following a favorable resolution of a civil or criminal matter. In my opinion they are absolutely not appropriate following the completion of a third party investigation initiated by a company. Such investigations are a standard part of the pre-litigation process; they do not eliminate the threat of litigation and they do not guarantee a successful defense.
I am even more skeptical that this statement was coordinated with counsel because it contains information that could be used to support other claims against the company. The statement gives credence to the idea that some employees may have felt pressured by a superior's spouse. There are a variety of causes of actions under which such an admission could be beneficial to a plaintiff's claims and these statements could conceivably be useful to other employees if they are considering the pursuit of unrelated actions.
mtrimpe|12 years ago
The right to make public statements (or not) is always a heavily contested point as I personally both can and can't talk about. ;)
recoveringesq|12 years ago
Most attorneys will advise clients not to make public statements until a matter has been resolved formally. Where appropriate, public statements are generally very direct and avoid detail.
I am skeptical that an attorney blessed statements like "we were fully cleared of all accusations of harassment" and "we learned that, despite, being found not guilty of the harassment accusations." These statements, particularly "found not guilty", would be appropriate following a favorable resolution of a civil or criminal matter. In my opinion they are absolutely not appropriate following the completion of a third party investigation initiated by a company. Such investigations are a standard part of the pre-litigation process; they do not eliminate the threat of litigation and they do not guarantee a successful defense.
I am even more skeptical that this statement was coordinated with counsel because it contains information that could be used to support other claims against the company. The statement gives credence to the idea that some employees may have felt pressured by a superior's spouse. There are a variety of causes of actions under which such an admission could be beneficial to a plaintiff's claims and these statements could conceivably be useful to other employees if they are considering the pursuit of unrelated actions.
bradhe|12 years ago
Totally! I mean, it's almost like they've been waiting silently for the go ahead to speak out or something!