re: How can anyone defend the conversations from the tapes?

quote:

---

If WW talks and just the act of talking about the matter becomes public then the chance of WW being subpoenaed increases. The defense then will have an interest in deposing WW and then the "tape" potentially becomes relevant and the judge then allows the "tape" into evidence.

---

Of course a statement through WW's attorney eliminates any of these concerns (if they truly exist). For example: Attorney says, "My client categorically denies any wrongdoing. The tapes are false and intentionally presented in a slanted fashion to create a false picture of wrongdoing. We are exploring all legal options to address this false and slanderous reporting. We will not comment further publicly and look forward to our day in court."

This also eliminates your unfounded worry of a perjury trap. Lying is not perjury. Your lawyer lying is not perjury. Perjury is lying under oath.
ETA: also to depose him they would have to subpoena him. Hell, he hasn't even been served a subpoena for trail in April. Very unlikely they could serve subpoena in time for a deposition before trial date.