The uproar following Tiger Wood’s one-vehicle accident at his home and the subsequent disclosure of multiple infidelities remains huge. The deluge of stories are in a temporary lull, but they are coming back when Tiger returns. There were a few thoughtful and even eloquent stories like this one from sports columnist Mike Wise. But the majority were pejorative, salacious, gossipy, breathless and tantalized. The gap between who we thought Tiger was and who he really turned out to be was simply too vast. A poll showing his popularity plummet from 85% to 34% in December, 2009 was seen as evidence of that public/private gap and the public feeling of being deceived by his behavior.

Charlie Sheen, on the other hand, caused hardly a ripple with news reports that his wife called 9-1-1 to report he had threatened her with a knife and that she was terrified he would kill her. While obviously we cannot know if these reports are true or not and Brooke Mueller (Sheen’s wife) is now retracting them—Charlie Sheen has been here before. His divorce from Denise Richards was fueled by reports of drug abuse and violence and their child custody dispute has been highly conflicted.

Yet while many of us seem to think Tiger Woods is despicable, we see Charlie Sheen’s alleged behavior as simply reflective of who he is—a bad boy. Tiger acknowledged his ‘transgressions’ and ‘infidelities’. Charlie’s lawyer says we shouldn’t jump to conclusions about anything.   Tiger broke our hearts while we expect no better from Charlie.

It’s an instructive lesson for us about the damage done when the behavior doesn’t match the image. We blogged about David Letterman’s acknowledgement of his own ‘bad behavior’ and how he masterfully spun an amusing and almost charming tale about his fall from grace. And then he stopped talking. As more news came out about his situation, many of us cringed a bit at what we heard, but Dave wasn’t talking. And the media focus passed.

What does this have to do with litigation consulting?  Simple.  It is never too early to think about identity for your clients, opponents, and witnesses.  If a party or key witness is risky to your case, prepare the jury for what they can expect.  Control expectations by characterizing a strong opposing witness as being an expert salesperson or a veteran speaker. Have early witnesses talk about how shy and nervous your client is.  By controlling expectations, you prepare the jury, and shape the way the witness is perceived.

Related posts:

1. Eliot Spitzer, Uncivil Behavior & Possibilities of Redemption
2. Lighter Skin, More Like Me
3. “I didn’t know truth had a gender”
4. “I can look into his eyes and just tell he is lying”
5. An uncivil union: Being ‘heard’