Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

July 25, 2013 | Mark Paradies

Houston Chronicle Reports Halliburton to Plead Guilty to Misdemeanor Destruction of Evidence in the Deepwater Horizon Case

A Houston Chronicle story (which has been deleted) should be a wake-up call to all corporate legal departments. You must give specific instructions to everyone in the field about potential evidence.

Reading the testimony during the trial, it seemed to me that the lawyers’ instructions to save everything from Deepwater Horizon could be misinterpreted by the local lab, so that cement that was the same lot as that used on the Deepwater Horizon job but not from there specifically wasn’t “saved” and produced as evidence.

The part that really got them in trouble was that the lab decided to test the similar cement but not to document the test (at least, that’s how I read the testimony). It seemed like they realized they had related cement but, by the letter of what they were told, were not required to provide it to the government.

Now Halliburton is pleading guilty to a felony and they are certainly in more trouble than they would have been had those in the lab asked the legal department … “Do you think this should be turned over as well?”

What policies do you have about evidence preservation? Are your investigators and supervisors well trained? What would your corporate lawyers do? Would they give clear instructions to investigators and supervisors?

Categories
Root Cause Analysis
-->
Show Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *