Photo by Elina Emurlaeva
When something big happens which leads to a high risk of facing many lawsuits, it may not be a good idea to do an interview beforehand. I know people want to hear from the artist himself and hopefully have some of their questions heard. But from a legal standpoint, this could affect your potential liability. Depending on what you say, or do not say, your statements may be used in court. That’s the concern I had when watching the latest interview with Travis Scott.
It’s best not to give your opponent anything to work with. This is a good rule to follow when dealing with any type of competition or battle, including lawsuits. It was recently revealed in the media that Travis Scott intends to seek a dismissal in all of the lawsuits filed against him. For those who are savvy on the legal arena, this is not surprising. In fact, a motion to dismiss, the official request made to the court in a lawsuit, is a common legal strategy used by defendants to have a claim dismissed prior to a trial. This is likely to what Travis Scott plans to be his next step in his lawsuits. However, speaking about the subject of the lawsuit outside of court might hinder his chances.
In order for a Motion to Dismiss to be granted, the person requesting dismissal of a claim must present a legal basis. The court will not grant such a request if there are facts that still need to be determined (juries, or the judge in cases where there are no juries, determine the facts). So here, Travis Scott must state in his request that the court should dismiss his case (on whatever legal basis) because the facts are undisputed and the law is clear when using these facts. However, when you have an interview where the defendant is answering questions one way, and witness are saying things happened another, the plaintiff use this to defend a Motion to Dismiss stating the facts still need to be determined regard certain issues.
I watched as much as I could of this interview before shaking my head and concluding that this could harm certain aspects of his case. Not saying it can ruin his whole defense, but this could make it last longer than he planned when a request for a dismissal was announced. What do you think? Does the interview help or hurt his legal case? Do you think that matters if it helps his fans hear from him?