In Stepney, several defendants had been charged with violating several drug and gun laws. In an effort to effectively prepare coherent defenses, the defense attorney tried to take a JDA. It was about the court. Specifically, the court looked at the large number of defendants, their lack of familiarity and the many different criminal complaints related to the case. The court also rightly expressed concern about the murder of an accused. Courts dealing with doctrine of common interest rarely, if at all, refer to the provisions of the relevant agreements of common interest. Instead, the courts consider the context, not the agreements. Participants of common interest should remember that they cannot automatically enter into a contract for the protection of privileges and that about half of agreements of common interest fail. Weissman invoked common defense privilege to ensure that his own confession was not used against him. To prove his right to privilege, Weissman`s lawyer said that at the beginning of the meeting, he asked the councillor to agree to the meeting being held according to a JDA. According to Weissman`s lawyer, the consultant agreed. Corporate Counsel, however, had another memory of the meeting, explaining that JDA was never discussed.
Questions of relevance and privilege arise in answering the question of whether it is possible to find agreements of common interest. .