Blog

Help Your Witness Deliver Effective Testimony with Full Sentences

 

 

Rare is the witness who isn’t anxious, worried, scared--even terrified--during deposition or cross-examination. Often this leads to a rapid pace of speech. Not only that, but witnesses tend to believe that if they just blurt out their response, they’ll get this dreadful experience over with sooner.

Now, there’s nothing wrong with speaking quickly, in and of itself, but speaking quickly often means the client fails to think things through. Failing to think through a response can often lead to flawed testimony if not downright disastrous testimony. Unfortunately, simply telling a witness to “slow down, speak more slowly” may work for a response or two, but with the pressure of nerves, the witness’s pace then picks up rapidly.

One technique that works well while preparing the witness for their testimony is to encourage the witness to speak in full sentences and to do so by first repeating part of the question. This has two advantages. First, it forces the witness to listen better to the question asked. You can’t very well repeat part of the question if you haven’t carefully listened to it. Secondly, it slows the response down. The witness is forced to think through their whole response, to concentrate. And that ensures better testimony.

For example, in response to “How soon after this meeting of May 22 did you visit the construction site?” “I visited the construction site next on May 30” slows the response down, as opposed to a simple “May 30.” It also helps the witness stay on track with the subject at hand.

This is even more critical with a compound question. For example, “Do you know whether you saw water in the trench or ever examined that trench before May 30?” The quick response of “No” could be inaccurate as to either seeing the water or examining the trench. A full-sentence response, such as “I did examine the trench before May 30, and I did not see water in the trench before May 30” may be wordy but could be more accurate.

Full sentences work to slow the witness down so that their brain is engaged before the response and to produce a more accurate response.

 

Classic Juror Misunderstandings

 

 

The brilliant cartoonist, Wiley Miller (“Non Sequitur”), captured the misunderstandings between men and women as few others have. For example, the wife says: “Let's go shopping." The husband hears: "Let's go drain the life force from your body." The husband says: “Honey, are you almost ready yet?" The wife hears: "Life as we know it will cease to exist unless you can alter the space-time continuum."

My experience with jurors has led me to conclude that similar misunderstandings occur regularly in the Courtroom between attorneys and jurors. For example, the lawyer says: “Negligence.” The juror hears: “Forgetfulness.” The lawyer says “Proximate.” The juror hears “Approximate.” The lawyer says: “Standard of care.” The juror hears: “Like OSHA.” The lawyer says: “Preponderance.” The juror hears: “Heavy thinking.”

I could go on and on. Lawyers like to say a graphic will “depict” things. Jurors need to know what the graphic will “show.” The lawyer says this event was “prior” to the current one. Jurors want to know what came “before” what. And “aforementioned” doesn’t even compute.

You must speak a language the jurors understand if you are to persuade them. For example, explain legal terms such as negligence so there can be no confusion with the more common use of the term, forgetfulness. Use words you used before you became a lawyer: familiar words, easy-to-understand words, words that don’t require more than a high school education.

With that, you are far more likely to have – a winning case!

Be Good to Your Jurors: Connect the Dots!

 

 

Too often, in jury debriefings and in focus groups, jurors complain that the attorneys do not connect their points or evidence to the specifics of the complaint. Furthermore, attorneys rarely fully explain the jury instructions to the jury, tying in those instructions to the attorney’s interpretation of the case.

In a classic case, namely the Blagojevich trial, the jury foreman brought up this very dilemma, saying of the U.S. attorneys: “They didn’t impress upon the jury the importance of the different counts and how they related to the six schemes that Rod Blagojevich was charged with. And as a consequence when we went into the deliberation room we were very confused. We didn’t know how to start….it was days before we found the indictment. We didn’t even know that the indictment was in the evidence carts.  Once we found that we were elated.” (Chicago Tonight TV show)

This lack of clarity leaves jurors in distress. They are confused, perturbed, and unable to think in a reasonable manner about the case.

Be good to your jurors. Always make the connection for them, in obvious, preferably visual ways, between the evidence and testimony, and the complaint/cross-complaint. Do the same with the jury instructions.

Experience shows time and again, that the attorney who presents their case the most clearly, all else being roughly equal, is the most likely to succeed.

The Eyes Have It: Does Your Witness Know How to Look at Jurors?

 

 

Telling your witness to look at the jurors during their testimony without teaching them how to do so can be fatal to your case. 

A scared, anxious witness may only dare a quick terrified glance mid-sentence at the jurors, which confirms in the jurors’ minds that yes, this witness is surely hiding something. So much for the witness’s credibility.

Or a witness may attempt to “duke it out” during cross by glaring at the jurors during their response, rather than focusing on opposing counsel. This does not benefit your case.

Help your witness look at the jury in a way that enhances their credibility even as it satisfies jurors’ need to see the witness’s eyes to determine veracity. Which, as many of us will remember, is why our mothers would say: “Look me in the eyes when you’re talking to me!”

During direct, suggest that your witness, when they have a response of a couple of sentences or more, begin their answer by looking at you, then turn out to the jurors and look at different jurors during the bulk of their response, to conclude their response by turning back to you during the last few words. If the witness can angle their body very slightly towards the jury box, then turning out towards the jurors is smoother. All this sounds easy, and certainly becomes easy, but only with practice.

I have found video-recorded role-play to be the most effective way to help witnesses get comfortable with turning to the jurors. It’s best to do this during direct, because during cross, the witness will rarely be given an opportunity to respond with more than a few words, and focusing on opposing counsel is their primary responsibility at that point.

“Look at the jurors,” yes, is a critical and essential instruction, but how it is done can make all the difference to your case.

 

Expert Under the Gun of Cross? Multi-sided Response to the Rescue

 

For your expert witnesses under the gun of cross-examination, usually the most problematic answer is a flat “yes” or “no.” Science holds few absolutes to be true, thus most scientists (which is the majority of your experts) are uncomfortable with an uncategorical “yes” or “no” in response to many of opposing counsel’s questions.

Yet opposing counsel has one goal in mind: get that expert to say “yes” to certain questions and “no” to certain others.

A useful technique is to suggest to your expert that they respond with a qualifier in front of their “yes” or “no,” such as: “In this situation, yes.” “Under certain conditions, no.” “When X is detected, yes.” “In the presence of Y, no.” And so on.

These responses open the door to asking your witness later, why they qualified their answer in such a manner.

Now, here’s where it gets really interesting: the results of meta-research on 107 different studies conducted over 50 years on persuasion and sidedness show that two-sided arguments are more persuasive than their one-sided equivalents, as long as counter-arguments are raised when presenting the opposing view.

So, in telling the jury the rationale behind the qualifier, the expert can present their thinking. For example: “It could be said, as opposing counsel’s expert stated, that X is a determining factor, however, more recent studies show that Y is the more decisive, thus the basis for my opinion.” This format serves to present the two sides of the argument, even as it raises the counter argument.

The Juror-Engaging Power of Story: Beyond the Individual

 

 

Research has demonstrated repeatedly the power of storytelling. Indeed, it’s easy for most attorneys to tell the story of their injured client or the malfunction of a product. Stories of individuals, plaintiff or defense, are also fairly easy to summon. But when it comes to businesses, companies or corporations, lawyers too often forget the power of story, and give but the driest of facts.

Yet it is story that will engage the jurors, story that will enable them to relate to your corporate/business client, story that will give them points of identification to their own lives, to their experience.

I remember waiting in a corporate reception area for an attorney and client I was to work with that day. On the walls were photographs, plaques and other corporate memorabilia. When I asked the attorney and client for the story of the corporation, not just corporation facts, they were at a loss. So I told them the story, as I had gleaned it from all that was portrayed in the reception area. Both were amazed that I could weave a story from so little. But it wasn’t so little! Those photographs and plaques told about the heart of the corporation, its community involvement and the background on why it was founded in the first place.

There was more, of course, but my telling primed the pump.

Don’t let your business or corporate clients be story-less entities. There is a story behind every venture, and that’s how you engage juror sympathy. Look for the story, mine for it, it is well worth the effort.

 

You Need a Timeline

 

 

Timelines are essential to just about any case. I’ve been teased by various attorneys I’ve worked with that I always recommend a timeline, and indeed it’s true.

But there is a method to my repeated,“You need a timeline!” The movement of events across time is how jurors anchor testimony in their minds. It’s how they create a “story” for themselves.

And the story is the single most compelling way to get facts and information across to the jurors in a coherent, persuasive manner.

The reason a timeline works so well, is it answers the fundamental question of storytelling: “And then what happened?” It ties together apparently disparate testimony or pieces of evidence. It grounds any narrative in logic, by assigning order to the events.

Timelines need to be designed around a horizontal axis representing time, with “flags” or “boxes” pegged at the appropriate moments in time. Timelines don’t need to be fancy, but different entities should have different colored “flags,” for example, to differentiate them easily. Beyond that, a graphics designer can help give a timeline more visual impact.

The temptation is often to put too much information on a timeline: it’s a tool meant to emphasize and support, not reiterate all the testimony. Several uncluttered, easy-to-read timelines are better than one crowded with too much for the eye to readily grasp.

It Takes A Village: Yet Another Focus Group Advantage

 

 

I consulted on a case where one of the possible witnesses was an individual in a highly respected line of work. This person had been involved in criminal activity some 30 years ago, but in the years since had made a wonderful turn-around, and was a veritable pillar of the community, loved and respected.

The attorneys who interacted with the witness said she was credible, quite charming, and would make an excellent witness.

With such a brilliant present, would the past matter? The attorneys and I weren’t sure and figured the best way to find out would be to present the witness to a focus group.

Imagine our surprise when what struck the focus group members wasn’t the long-ago criminal activity, but the witness’s “smarmy-ness.” They didn’t find the witness charming, they thought she was smirking. The focus group members stated the witness wasn’t taking the present matter seriously, and that her attitude was entirely too cavalier. They did not find her credible at all.

With that, since the witness’s appearance at trial was not obligatory, it was quickly decided not to have the witness take the stand. We would never have realized the impact of this particular individual in front of a jury had it not been for the valuable input of the focus group members.

 Once again, a focus group saved the day.

 

Use “Less is More” to Win in Court

 

 

Some courts are lenient with the amount of time allotted for a trial, some are not. It certainly can seem impossible, sometimes, to jam the amount of evidence and testimony you have in the number of hours permitted.

And yet, as is so often true of many things in life “Less is more.”

On being debriefed, some jurors stated that the matter at hand was treated with less than full consideration as the trial stretched on and on. Jurors began discussing plans for the various events in their lives, sharing thoughts about how to deal with children, difficult bosses, and so on, clearly impatient and bored with what they were experiencing as an unnecessarily long process.

Jurors who may have had the patience to sit through long trials and long deliberations some 10 or so years ago are no longer willing to be held hostage past what they consider a sufficient rendering of the facts and testimony. Our world has sped up tremendously: we abbreviate everything, we rely on bullets and headlines, and we expect everything to happen quickly, as in “now.”

This is one of the great advantages of focus groups: attorneys are forced to reduce their entire case to a mere hour and a half, which puts a glaring spotlight on what is essential and what could be left aside.

Yes, you still must get across your points, you must still develop testimony and present evidence appropriately. However, a great deal can often be trimmed from the presentation of your case without losing impact. If anything, you generally gain impact from being succinct.

What the Trix Cereal Rabbit Can Teach Litigators

 

 

So you thought cutesy cereal boxes were designed just to capture your innocent toddler’s rapt attention? Nope. In a Cornell University study, researchers manipulated the gaze of the cartoon rabbit on Trix cereal boxes and found that adult subjects were more likely to choose Trix over competing brands if the rabbit was looking at them rather than away: “Making eye contact even with a character on a cereal box inspires powerful feelings of connection.”

But there’s more: according to research conducted at Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine, when doctors make more eye contact with their patients, those patients enjoy better health, comply with medical advice more often, and are more likely to seek treatment for future problems. In other words, these patients listen to and follow the advice of their doctors. Precisely what you need your jurors to do.

Eye contact engages us. Eye contact facilitates communication. Eye contact influences others. Eye contact is persuasive.

When you are conducting voir dire, make eye contact as often as possible, especially when listening to a response, or asking a question. If you need to glance at your notes, do so after a response, before your next question.

Throughout the trial, take advantage of the persuasive power of eye contact to look at jurors whenever you are making an important point. Encourage your witnesses to look out at the jurors, especially during direct.

Marketers have billions on the line; where the rabbit looks is of vital importance. You have just as much at stake, if not more, every time you walk into the courtroom. 

Use Visual “Bullets” to Bring Home Your Salient Points

 

 

You spend hours, if not days, honing your opening, crafting your expert examination questions, drilling down your closing arguments.

As well you should, for there’s nothing like diligent preparation to ensure solid trial work. However, as important as your preparation is, how the jurors are going to receive the result of all that intense prep is equally important.

Studies consistently reveal that people forget most readily what they hear. Memory is far better for things that people see or touch. So it’s not only what has long been established - that people absorb communication better when it’s visual as well as auditory - but also that words are too easily forgotten.

And if there’s anything you need when those jurors go into the jury room, it’s for them to remember your salient points.

The temptation is to reproduce on PowerPoint or other visual media, lots of text, so that jurors both see and hear relevant testimony. That’s certainly useful, but you might also consider taking a page from Steve Jobs’ presentations. Regardless of what one may think about the man or his product, Jobs’ presentations are universally considered among the most compelling ever.

Jobs mastered the art of a single image capturing the essence of his point. Sometimes a single word, or a single number. These are the visual equivalent of “bullet points,” but with far more effectiveness than the usual list of bullet points since images are easily and often forcefully, remembered.

Help your jurors take your salient points into the jury room - with visual “bullets.”  

The Question’s Not the Problem: The Answer May Be

 

 

How many times in your youth, were you told by a benevolent, or at the very least, good-hearted, coach or teacher, “There’s no such thing as a stupid question.” You’ve probably said that very phrase to your children as well. 

And yet, when jurors ask during deliberations to have something explained to them or ask a question that clearly reveals their lack of understanding, lawyers will frequently roll their eyes and mutter about “the decline in average intelligence” or mumble about the impossibility of getting “bright jurors” on the panel.

Similarly, in focus groups, when it’s obvious the mock jurors have completely missed a lawyer’s point, the lawyer will often blame the jurors for their stupidity . . . which drives me absolutely berserk.

Jurors are people who are good at what they do! Whether that’s repairing cars, or managing a convenience store, or cleaning houses. And just like the internationally acclaimed show “Undercover Boss” revealed the inability of most bosses to accomplish the mundane tasks of their employees, I defy any attorney to walk in the shoes of any juror and accomplish their tasks in life, from bus driver to pediatric nurse, with the same level of expertise as said juror.

There are no stupid questions. There are simply different arenas and levels of experience in the world. Run your cases by focus groups whenever you can to ferret out what are the issues critical to your case that jurors are likely to misunderstand or fail to comprehend. 

Then do all that you can, with the aid of visuals whenever possible, to clarify matters for those who will be your “real” jurors. 

There are no stupid questions. But there are some mightily confusing, obfuscating answers.

Address Your Jurors’ Overriding Concerns: Safety & Trust

 

 

Did you know that the United States is near the top of all countries in terms of anxiety? The U.S. comes in a close second behind Greece in adult stress levels—55 percent according to the Gallup World Emotions Report. This number is 20 percent higher than the global average.

We live in one of the most affluent societies in the world, and yet the majority of our population does not feel safe. Safety is, put bluntly, Americans’ overriding concern.

How does this matter to you? Whether you are plaintiff or defense, you must take into account how your jurors will perceive the safety factors inherent in your case. This does not merely apply to product liability, medical malpractice or personal injury cases, where safety concerns are usually obvious. This applies equally to business contract cases, disputes over IP, even eminent domain.

Safety, you see, isn’t just about physical safety. Safety is also about emotional safety, the ability to trust--to trust self and others, to trust those we deal with day to day, be they drivers or doctors or everything in between, to trust businesses, corporations, and other institutions. When you can’t trust someone or something, you don’t feel safe.

Americans’ overriding concern is safety. Your jurors’ overriding concerns revolve around safety. Pay attention to the safety and trust issues in your case, and address them appropriately.

Who Has The Longer Attention Span? Your Jurors or A Goldfish?

 

 

--The average attention span of a human being in 2000: 12 seconds

--The average attention span of a human being in 2023: 8.25 seconds

--The average attention span of a goldfish: 9 seconds

Do I have your attention now?!

This is the unfortunate reality you are up against in the courtroom. A goldfish has a longer attention span than today’s average juror . . .

Our attention span has shortened as our world has become more complex, faster, more demanding, and more bite-sized. This is not a put-down of jurors or anyone else. It is simply a reality that is best dealt with, not avoided.

Short sentences, introducing a single idea in a single sentence, pausing between short paragraphs--these are techniques that will serve you well in assuring you retain juror attention.

Beyond that, use visuals. We have become a visually-obsessed society. We are geared to paying attention to visuals, rather than words. The good news is that when well-designed and executed, visuals can encapsulate lengthy explanations that the jurors can grasp in those critical 8 seconds, whereas the verbal explanation--albeit still necessary--may take hours to thoroughly present.

A Dynamite Persuasion Technique: “But You Are Free”

 

 

We live in the “land of the free, home of the brave.” As a people, we cherish freedom, but it’s something lawyers do not always factor into voir dire and closing arguments.

And yet, 42 psychological studies on 22,000 people has shown that the single most powerful persuasion technique is to give people the freedom to choose. In other words, when you ask someone to do something, make sure to add to your request, “but you are free” to do otherwise.

The exact words don’t matter, for example, the phrase “But obviously do not feel obliged” worked as well as “but you are free.” What’s important is that people resist being forced to a singular choice. When you give them the option to choose, people are more amenable to being persuaded by you.

The used-car salesman who says “But of course, you’re free to compare the price with other dealers” is more likely to make the sale than the salesman who hammers a “this deal is the best deal you’ll ever get” approach.

However you phrase it, whenever possible, give jurors a “but you are free” option: free to choose as their conscience dictates, free to come to some other conclusion--all the while putting your choice forward, leading them to it rather than corralling them into it.

Photo Credit: Brandonrush, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

Use Repetition to Drive Juror Acceptance of Your Case

 

When the jurors troop into the jury room for deliberations, every litigator’s dream is that each of them would, individually, spout your case theme/key points so that group consensus in your favor is inevitable.

But how do you get them to do that? By presenting a targeted, credible and compelling case. That’s a given. In addition, put the power of repetition to work for you.

Research by K. Weaver and colleagues shows that repetition, even by the same person or organization, is highly impactful: “…when an opinion is repeatedly broadcast at us by the same organization--think of a particular media conglomerate or an advertiser--we’re likely to come to believe it represents the general opinion. That’s despite the fact it is analogous to the same person repeating themselves over and over again.”

Not only should you, the trial attorney, repeat your themes and key points throughout your opening, examination of witnesses, and close, but all your witnesses, expert and lay, should be encouraged to include case themes and key points in their testimony.

Repeat, repeat, repeat! When you and your witnesses are consistent in broadcasting the same message over and over again, jurors are far more likely to accept it as the general opinion and adopt it as theirs.

 

Pressuring Potential Jurors in Voir Dire Can Backfire at Trial

 

 

Time after time, what I discover in jury debriefings is that jurors don’t like being “interrogated” during voir dire. They don’t mind being questioned, but they heartily dislike attorney attempts to force answers out of them and especially resent being pressured into a “yes” or “no” response.

Now this wouldn’t be so critical if it weren’t for the fact that people who feel pressured into a position, retaliate by disliking the person who pressured them. Cornered animals bite. So do jurors.

As tempting as it is to finally get that unqualified “yes” or “no” from a juror, be aware of the consequences. A juror who doesn’t like you will be far less susceptible to your arguments, and may very well damn you during deliberations. Not only that but the unqualified “yes” or “no” is often the juror simply trying to wriggle free from your unwanted persistence.

You may receive a sufficiently truthful and more accurate response by framing your question differently such that it doesn’t antagonize your juror unnecessarily: “Is it more likely that you would . . .” People respond well to choice, as well as to the word “would,” which is experienced as non-invasive.

Win Your Case by Winning Client Cooperation!

 

 

It’s often said that the practice of law would be great if it weren’t for clients. Clients, of course, are what drive your business, so like it or not, part of a successful practice is learning how to deal with difficult clients.

Most clients don’t set out to be difficult, but in their frustration, anxiety or fear, they are difficult. Given that understanding, one way to assure easier interactions with your clients is to tell them upfront what to expect. This will allay their fears to some extent, which in turn will usually make them less difficult to deal with.

Let your client know, at the beginning of the relationship, that the unexpected will crop up as you handle their case. This isn’t a maybe, it’s a guarantee. Every case has its unanticipated events. Sometimes that unexpected situation will be to your client’s advantage and sometimes not. Let your client know that you will promptly inform them of the bumps and hurdles as they come along and how you expect to deal with them.

Ask your client how they prefer to be informed: by email, phone, never on a Friday, only in the afternoon, whatever. Don’t assume that the way you like to communicate is satisfying to your client. Respect their preferences. Your client may not like what they hear from you, but they will feel kept in the loop in the way they like to receive information. This, in and of itself, will often soothe a fitful client. You will have acknowledged and respected their wishes, which in turn is likely to make things a little easier for you through the life of the case.

Want to Win? Start Off On The Right Foot With Prospective Jurors

 

 

When prospective jurors walk into the courtroom, they only know one thing for sure: the courtroom is His/Her Honor’s private reserve, and the Judge’s word is law. Everything about the physical layout of the courtroom says “In this room, the Judge is Top Dog, and whatever they say is set in stone.” The Judge sits higher than everyone else. All must rise upon the Judge’s entrance, and may only be seated when told to do so. And whatever the Judge says, however erudite or nonsensical it may seem, becomes “what is” in that Courtroom.

So, imagine my surprise when I observe lawyers go directly against a Judge’s “what I expect in my courtroom.”  I know, from years of experience, that jurors, whether prospective or empaneled, ding any lawyer who fails to respect a Judge’s stated orders. The most common failure is the failure to respect time. For example, the Judge says “Your mini-opening will be two minutes, no longer.” The lawyer launches into their mini-opening, the two-minute mark is hit, the Judge cuts the lawyer off – sometimes, mid-word. The lawyer, hurt and surprised, sits down. The prospective jurors look coldly at the lawyer. They heard the rule, why couldn’t the lawyer obey it?

You see, prospective jurors MUST appear when summoned, MUST be on time, MUST turn off their mobile devices, MUST sit where told to sit, and the list goes on. When the Judge tells you what you MUST do, you’re well advised to do it. Failure to do so makes you disrespectful in prospective jurors’ eyes, and less worthy of their consideration. Much harder to convince.

Since your jurors are within that pool of prospective jurors, abiding by the Judge’s edicts right from the git-go is the easiest, quickest way to get their approval.

Start off on the right foot with your jurors, and you have a much better chance of ending on the right foot.

How Your Emotions Can Help You Win Your Case

 

 

The question of whether to trust our logic or trust our emotions is rarely brought up in the context of legal matters, at least not from the lawyer’s point of view. Certainly, we discuss endlessly how this or that prospective juror’s mindset (highly emotional versus highly rational) might impact our case, but not usually how the lawyer’s emotion would.

However, research by M. Pham, L. Lee and A. Stephen provides interesting insights into the positive impact lawyer emotions might have in winning cases.

Their study showed that people who were more likely to trust their feelings were also more likely to accurately predict the outcome of a particular event. The researchers call this phenomenon the “emotional oracle effect.”

How does this apply to winning your case? Tune in to your emotions. If, when preparing a witness, you sense that something is “off,” don’t dismiss that because your logic tells you all is well. Trust your emotions enough to say something like “I notice that . . .” or “I’m wondering if. . .” which is a non-threatening way to probe further and take a look at whether or not what you sense with this witness has some basis in reality.

The more you practice listening to the guidance of your emotions, the more you will be able to discern which to trust.

Similarly, you can review the demographics of your prospective jurors all you want and weed out the obvious “bad apples,” but when it comes down to that moment in voir dire when you’re between “keep Juror A versus Juror B,” tune in to your emotions. Listen inside yourself for that intuitive hit and go with it.

Your mind is bigger than your analytic prowess. Use all of it, rational and emotive, in the service of your success.

Get Those Undecideds On Your Side: With Jury Instructions

 

Despite the best efforts of all involved, jury instructions remain obscure and confusing to all but the most legalese-savvy jurors. Cases should be won or lost on their merits, but too often, cases are lost (or unsatisfactory verdicts obtained) because the jurors either did not understand the jury instructions, or how those jury instructions should be specifically applied to the verdict form.

Clarifying jury instructions so jurors can make their way through the verdict form fully understanding what their vote means, is important. That’s step one. But then it’s critical to move on to step two: letting the jurors know during closing argument not only how they should vote (according to you), but why.

It’s the “why” that is often left out. You need to arm the jurors already decided by your arguments with sufficient ammunition to convince the undecideds – reiterating the evidence/testimony simply isn’t enough.

“Why” consists of firmly tying specific evidence supporting your case to specific verdict questions, preferably in bullet form, which is easier for your decided-jurors to remember and use in their “Here’s why” during deliberations.

Undecided jurors are your “make it or break it” jurors, and they only make up their minds during deliberations. If you don’t give those jurors already on your side the information they need to swing the undecideds over, you leave the verdict up to chance. Or worse, up to ill-formed, confused, half-hearted attempts, for in the absence of solid rationale, what else can your decided-jurors argue?

Want Powerful Testimony? Adopt the Power-Sit

 

 

Witnesses are nervous enough already at the thought of testifying. Being loaded down with 10 body-language directives from well-meaning attorneys doesn’t necessarily enhance their testimony.

I have found that one simple directive ‘fixes’ a whole host of body-language problems. That is the “Power-Sit.”

Simply put, the witness sits with their rear planted firmly in the “L” of the chair, which assures good posture without having to think about it. They then are asked to avoid leaning to the left or right and to keep their back in contact with the back of the chair at all times. That the more nervous they get, the more the witness can press their back into the back of the chair. It becomes their ‘secure’ or ‘safe’ place.

The impression jurors receive from the “Power-Sit” is that of a confident, straightforward, credible witness – one whose testimony is far more likely to be believed than the testimony from a witness who slumps, or leans to the left or right, or aggressively forward, to give but a few examples.

What a platform for effective testimony! Without your witness having to remember 10 different directives, they only have to focus on one. Now you are free to focus on the substantive issues in your witness’ testimony, knowing their body language won’t be contradicting the testimony.

Don’t Let the Curse of Knowledge Nuke You at Trial!

 

 

Jurors will not find for what they don’t understand. Simple, right? Yet laying your case out in such a way that jurors readily understand its ins and outs can be more challenging than it at first appears.

You see, you may be so deeply steeped in your case, the issues of your case, the whys and wherefores of your case, that you can’t imagine what it is like not to know about them. You’ve fallen victim to the curse of your own knowledge.

Certainly, you are well aware that the jurors are uninformed as to the legal aspects of the case, but too often, you don’t tune in to how necessary it is to explain everything about your case in a way your jurors can readily and easily understand. Including whatever testimony your experts proffer.

This doesn’t mean giving excessive detail. It doesn’t mean to “talk down” to jurors, either. Jurors are no different from the folks you interact with every day, from the barista to your mechanic to your support staff. They just have different areas of expertise - in which they are far better informed than you, BTW.

Build your jurors’ confidence in their ability to come to a wise and appropriate verdict by streamlining your arguments and presenting your key evidence with stunning clarity. Wherever you can, use visuals to further clarify and explain.

If at all possible, run a focus group pre-trial of individuals similar to your jury pool. They will tell you, with unerring accuracy, exactly what persons not afflicted with the curse of your particular knowledge will understand or fail to understand.

Now you are much better prepared to win at trial!

Who Wants A Perceived Liar On The Stand? Not You!

 

 

People aren’t very good at detecting liars. Studies show that people’s hit rate for detecting lies (54%) is slightly above pure chance (50%), which is good news for liars, but bad news for you in the courtroom.

Why? Because people tend to pay attention to certain cues to determine if someone is lying, but these cues may mean something entirely different.

Take the “vocal immediacy” cue, for example. Vocal immediacy is the directness with which someone responds to a question. The more roundabout or vague the response, the more likely jurors will figure your witness is lying. However, your witness may simply be thinking out loud, which sounds roundabout. Or your witness may not know what to say, and rather than answer “I don’t know,” or “I don’t understand the question” may resort to a vague mulling which again, looks like lying.

Another cue is “uncooperativeness.” Jurors commonly assume that a witness being uncooperative is hiding something, or being dishonest. Yet often an uncooperative witness is one who argues with opposing counsel rather than answer the question asked, or attempts to force their view of the facts into every response, rather than let their attorney do the litigating.

Your best witness—among other things—responds directly to the question asked, and leaves the lawyering to the lawyer.

The best tool to help your witnesses get to jury-worthy credibility is to use videotaped role-play in preparing them to testify. You can’t afford to let your witnesses get away with behaviors that could be mistaken by the jurors as those of a liar.

Put “Truthiness” To Work For You At Trial

 

 

The value of visuals in trial work is well established, in that images emphasize and clarify testimony or evidence. However, research shows that visuals have impact in yet another way, which can be put to powerful use in the courtroom. 

Scientists in New Zealand and Canada examined what satirist Stephen Colbert calls “truthiness” – the feeling that something is true. What they discovered is that when a statement, whether true or not, is accompanied by a simply decorative photograph [i.e., one that does not reveal the validity of the claim], it is more likely to be perceived as true. People simply “feel” that the statement is more likely to be true, by virtue of the accompanying visual.

So the statement “The liquid metal inside a thermometer is magnesium” accompanied by a picture of a thermometer (which revealed nothing about the metal inside), was believed to be true far more often than the same statement not accompanied by a decorative photograph.

What does this mean for you? That even when you don’t have a visual or graphic that directly elucidates testimony/evidence you are confident is credible, it’s worth attaching a visual that in some way relates to the testimony/evidence. You thus have greater chances of engaging jurors’ feeling that the testimony is truthful, as you know it to be.

Once again, the mighty power of visuals is revealed!