Tex McIver Prosecutors Want Journalists to Testify
Fulton County prosecutors have subpoenaed journalists from four news organizations that have covered the shooting death of Atlanta attorney Tex McIver's wife, Diane. But they have been circumspect about what it is they want to know.
March 08, 2018 at 03:09 PM
5 minute read
In their quest to convince a jury that Atlanta attorney Tex McIver intentionally shot and killed his wife, Fulton County prosecutors have subpoenaed journalists who reported on Diane McIver's death to testify at his murder trial.
Reporters from the Atlanta's WSB-TV, WAGA-TV and the Daily Report have been subpoenaed, and a court order was also granted certifying a former Atlanta Journal-Constitution reporter, now living in New York, as a material witness.
The journalists published or broadcast interviews that included statements from McIver, a former partner with Fisher & Phillips; McIver spokesman Bill Crane; or McIver's former defense attorney, Stephen Maples, about the circumstances surrounding the shooting. McIver has never denied shooting his wife inside the couple's SUV on an Atlanta street as they were driven home by a friend. But he has always said the shooting was accidental.
In addition to the reporters, prosecutors have listed Crane and Maples as witnesses.
Maples, whom McIver summoned to Emory University Hospital on Sept. 26, 2016, as medical personnel tried to save his wife, is no longer a member of McIver's defense team. McIver is now represented by Bruce Harvey and Don Samuel of Garland, Samuel & Loeb.
Maples and a team from Polsinelli led by former Fulton Superior Court Judge William Hill withdrew in November, leaving only Harvey, who later pulled in Samuel.
McIver is charged with murder and influencing witnesses. Those witnesses include Crane, Dani Jo Carter, who was driving the couple home, and Carter's husband.
Media attorneys have filed motions to quash subpoenas for journalists Morse Diggs of Fox 5, WSB reporter Mark Winne, former AJC reporter Craig Schneider and Meredith Hobbs of the Daily Report. The lawyers contend in their motions that calling reporters to testify without any parameters could run afoul of the state's reporter shield law.
Georgia law protects journalists from having to disclose information, documents or other items obtained or prepared in the course of their work in any proceeding where they are not a party, unless what is sought is material, relevant and necessary to the case and cannot reasonably be obtained by other means.
Duane Morris partner Cynthia Counts argued in motions to quash subpoenas for Hobbs and Diggs that compelling testimony from journalists “will chill news reporting because journalists will be viewed as, in effect, an investigative arm” of the courts. Common practice is for the parties to stipulate to the authenticity of a news report rather than subpoena a reporter to testify, she said.
“The state can't just put reporters on the stand so they can fish for possible evidence,” she added.
Counts and Tom Clyde, a partner at Atlanta's Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton who represents Winne and Schneider, said prosecutors have been circumspect about what they want reporters to testify about and why they want to put them on the stand, rather than let the reporting speak for itself.
“So far, it has been difficult to pin down exactly what testimony the state wants to try to get with the subpoenas to our reporters,” Clyde said. “That's concerning, because the burden is squarely on the state to show why the testimony is not protected by the reporters' privilege. These are just journalists doing their job exactly as they are supposed to do it.”
Prosecutors Clint Rucker and Adam Abbate said in a petition to certify Schneider as a material witness that an article he published based on interviews with Tex McIver “directly related to the circumstances of the crimes charged” and “detailed critical facts related to elements of the crimes.” Information in Schneider's article contradicted McIver's previous statements, prosecutors said.
A review of the news reports referenced in motions associated with the subpoenas suggest a number of contradictory statements were made not by McIver but by Maples, who represented McIver and was trying to correct what he said were inaccurate statements Crane made about the shooting.
Those statements centered on Crane's explanation that Diane McIver handed her husband the gun, which he kept in the vehicle console, after McIver expressed concerns about the neighborhood they were in and a fear of Black Lives Matter protests, which had taken place in Atlanta that weekend.
Maples also revised Crane's claim that the gun fired when the SUV hit a bump in the road. And in an interview with Diggs, the lawyer said McIver fell asleep despite his concerns because he had been treated for “a sleep condition.”
McIver's defense team has long fought to exclude testimony referencing alleged fears of Black Lives Matter. They have asked presiding Chief Judge Robert McBurney to exclude any testimony about race, claiming it would create an unfair prejudice and mislead the jury.
But prosecutors have countered that McIver's attempts through his lawyer and spokesman to back away from claims involving Black Lives Matter illustrates McIver changed his story ”several times.” McIver didn't mention any alarm about Black Lives Matter protesters in his interview with Atlanta police after the shooting.
McBurney has agreed to allow prosecutors to rebut McIver's claim that the shooting was accidental “by exploring if and how [the] defendant sought to influence what others said to the investigating authorities,” including references to Black Lives Matter.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSunbelt Law Firms Experienced More Moderate Growth Last Year, Alongside Some Job Cuts and Less Merger Interest
4 minute readFowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
3 minute readGeorgia High Court Clarifies Time Limit for Lawyers' Breach-of-Contract Claims
6 minute readSoutheast Firm Leaders Predict Stability, Growth in Second Trump Administration
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gunderson Dettmer Opens Atlanta Office With 3 Partners From Morris Manning
- 2Decision of the Day: Court Holds Accident with Post Driver Was 'Bizarre Occurrence,' Dismisses Action Brought Under Labor Law §240
- 3Judge Recommends Disbarment for Attorney Who Plotted to Hack Judge's Email, Phone
- 4Two Wilkinson Stekloff Associates Among Victims of DC Plane Crash
- 5Two More Victims Alleged in New Sean Combs Sex Trafficking Indictment
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250