Experts are crucial in public deliberation for providing background information, answering questions, and delivering presentations. However, their presence in deliberative forums can create tension, potentially diminishing citizen participation by overshadowing non-expert voices. This study examines a case where an expert disrupted a water scarcity forum by "going rogue," and applies stasis theory to suggest how experts can be effectively integrated into public deliberations. The study advocates for careful communication design and training to ensure that experts enhance rather than hinder the deliberative process, helping to resolve issues of conjecture and definition and allowing groups to focus on substantive policy discussions.