Category Archives: Closing Argument

Using the “Rule of Three.”

10 Saturday Sep 2016

Posted by in Closing Argument, Jury Persuasion, Legal Writing, Opening Argument, Oral Argument, Storytelling, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Using the “Rule of Three.”

Tags

, , , ,

Remember the Rule of 3: It’s Simple, Logical, and Effective, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator™

http://bit.ly/2chpUMD

So simple, but so persuasive. It is especially useful in oral argument, which is the topic of this post from Dr. Broda-Bahm. -CCE

[W]hen litigators are looking for a way to paint a bit of style and rhetorical effectiveness into their oral arguments, openings, or closings, the rule of three ought to be one of the first items in your tool box. Focusing on — you guessed it — three reasons, this post will explain why.

Continue reading →

Litigation and The Art of Storytelling.

07 Friday Aug 2015

Posted by in Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Direct Examination, Jury Persuasion, Opening Argument, Oral Argument, Storytelling, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Litigation and The Art of Storytelling.

Tags

, , , ,

Tell It: The Top 10 Posts on Story, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog

http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2015/07/tell-it-the-top-10-posts-on-story.html

The ‘story model’ (Hastie, Penrod & Pennington, 1983) for litigation persuasion is appropriately considered gospel at this point. At the same time, there is an art to it. In most courtrooms, I see litigators who are aware of the need to tell a story, but not necessarily versed in the techniques of storytelling. As I’ve explored from time to time in this blog, beyond laying out the events in temporal sequence, there are some nuances relating to structure, imagery, audience, and point of view. In short, there is a substantial ‘advanced course’ in narrative that effective trial lawyers should study. To make that a little easier, here are our top 10 posts so far on storytelling in trial. . . .

Continue reading →

The ABA’s List of the Top 25 Legal Movies.

17 Friday Apr 2015

Posted by in Closing Argument, Direct Examination, Jury Persuasion, Opening Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques, Witness Preparation, Witnesses

≈ Comments Off on The ABA’s List of the Top 25 Legal Movies.

Tags

, , , ,

The 25 Greatest Legal Movies, by Richard Brust, ABA Journal

http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/the_25_greatest_legal_movies

There is a unique group of movies that show the best — and worst — traits and practices by the legal profession. We all have our favorites. Check out the ABA’s list. Are your top choices there? If not, please leave a comment, and share your favorite. -CCE 

What would Hollywood do without lawyers? In a town built on copyrights and cosmetic surgery, lawyers have done far more than pen the small print in studio contracts or post bail for hollow-eyed stars on the way to and from rehab. From the incisive Henry Drummond and the droll Mr. Lincoln to the callow Danny Kaffee and the regal Atticus Finch, lawyers have provided some of Hollywood’s most memorable cinematic heroes and some of its most honorable and thoughtful films.

Earlier this year, the ABA Journal asked 12 prominent lawyers who teach film or are connected to the business to choose what they regard as the best movies ever made about lawyers and the law. We’ve collated their various nominees to produce our jury’s top picks.

Together these films represent 31 Oscar wins and another 85 nominations as befits the best work of some of the greatest actors, writers and directors of their time.

So quiet, please. A rap of the gavel, a pull of the curtain, and ‘Hear ye! Hear ye!’ for the 25 greatest law films ever made. . . .

Continue reading →

Jury Persuasion For Mixed Gender Message Delivery.

13 Saturday Dec 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Implied Bias, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Opening Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire

≈ Comments Off on Jury Persuasion For Mixed Gender Message Delivery.

Tags

, , , ,

Simple Jury Persuasion: Gender And Message Delivery And Framing, by Douglas Keene, The Jury Room Blog

http://tinyurl.com/osj9h23

Trial lawyers (and others who communicate to persuade) are always looking for a ‘silver bullet’ with which to gild their courtroom presentations. Today’s research offers a glimpse at this holy grail . . . as long as your listeners are either all male or all female. But fear not, there is also something very useful embedded in the results that allows you to improve the receptivity of a mixed gender audience to your message.

Researchers wanted to see if varying message delivery and message framing would make a difference in how the same message was perceived by male and female listeners. In other words, they wondered if you need to communicate differently to a male audience than to a female audience. They examined 2 kinds of message delivery and 2 kinds of message framing in a study focused on being physically fit.

To explore this, they created four (45 seconds long) videos about the importance of regular exercise (a male actor played the part of narrator ‘Dr. Linton,’ a health expert). The messages on the video were delivered in either an eager or a vigilant style and with either a gain or loss framing. (That means there were four versions of the video:  eager delivery style with either a gain message or a loss message or a vigilant style with either a gain message or a loss message.) . . .

Former Convictions Do Not Always Ruin Witness Credibility.

28 Tuesday Oct 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Direct Examination, Opening Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques, Witness Preparation, Witnesses

≈ Comments Off on Former Convictions Do Not Always Ruin Witness Credibility.

Tags

, , , , ,

Don’t Assume Prior Convictions Kill Credibility, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog

http://tinyurl.com/lgssphj

The witness is in good shape and the testimony looks to be great. There’s just one little problem in his past: a conviction. Litigators are understandably concerned about any threats to witness credibility, but if that threat comes in the form of a rap sheet, that’s viewed as a very damaging fact, if not a ticking time bomb. The effects of a prior conviction are most often written about in a criminal defense context where the research generally shows that the fact of a prior conviction significantly increases the chances of a current conviction, particularly where the prior conviction is for a similar crime. But it can be a factor for any witness who’s had a prior brush with the law. In civil cases, crimes involving dishonesty can be admitted for the narrow purpose of impeaching a witness’s credibility. A recent study (Stanchi & Bowen, 2014) that focused on a civil trial context looks at the question of whether the damage is as bad as one might suspect. The results? No it isn’t. In a realistic controlled study, the researchers found that prior conviction evidence did not increase the chances for an adverse verdict. Instead, emphasis on the conviction caused mock jurors to frame the trial as more of a zero sum contest on witness credibility — a frame that can end up actually benefiting the convicted witness.  

These results have some implications for attorneys assessing the risks to their witnesses’ credibility. . . . .

Working On Your Closing Argument? Use the Persuasion Slide.

14 Monday Jul 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Working On Your Closing Argument? Use the Persuasion Slide.

Tags

, , , , ,

Use the ‘Persuasion Slide,’ by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm:, Persuasive Litigator

http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/convincing-closing/

Some great practical ideas for persuasion come from the field of marketing. To be sure, not all apply in legal settings, but marketing offers a laboratory where the practical aspects of human influence can be addressed in a situation that often carries high stakes and measurable results. I recently came across one marketing idea from Roger Dooley’s Neuromarketing blog that provides a perfect way of explaining and differentiating the various forces at work in any persuasive situation. The idea is called ‘The Persuasion Slide,’ and it starts with the simple physics involved in an ordinary playground slide. Like a good trial metaphor or demonstrative exhibit, the illustration provides a simple and immediately meaningful way to understand a more complex process. . . . .

Juries and Social Labeling.

28 Saturday Jun 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Jury Instructions, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Opening Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Juries and Social Labeling.

Tags

, , , , , ,

“Everyday is a Great Day!” Self-Fulfilling Prophecy and Social Labeling, by Jill D. Schmid Ph.D., Tsongas® Blog

http://tinyurl.com/ljah59y

‘Everyday is a great day!’ That’s what he said, and appeared to believe with every fiber of his body. He was a 20-something, male clerk in an airport hotel’s gift shop. My response to, ‘How are you today?’ paled in comparison. ‘Oh, alright,’ I said as I contemplated what was about to be a very long research day. I didn’t expect to have a philosophical discussion that morning, but after what he said, I couldn’t help but ask his secret.  He looked so content, so convincing, so . . . what’s the word?  Oh yeah, happy.

So I asked, and his answer stuck with me.  He said about five years earlier he found himself in a tough spot; he was making poor choices; he was unhappy and making others around him unhappy. He decided to change his life, and he would do it by simply declaring that every day was special, that ‘everyday is a great day!’ He said from that point on, his attitude changed and he noticed that others’ attitudes also changed.  He found that when he’d tell people that, they smiled and seemed a bit lighter, less stressed. I felt the same – his answer had reminded me that I should be focusing on the positive; that I should be thankful to have a job that allows me to have interesting and challenging conversations nearly every day; that I should be looking forward to interacting with a whole new group of people – people who had important things to say and from whom I would learn a lot. In short, it really was about to be a great day, and I needed to change my attitude.

I was reminded of this encounter during a recent jury selection.  While I typically believe it’s somewhat of a waste of time to elicit ‘promises’ from your potential jurors (i.e., ‘Do you promise that you’ll give my client a fair shake?’ ‘Do you promise that you’ll follow all of the judge’s instructions?’ ‘Do you promise to not let your sympathies influence your decision?”), this attorney took a similar, but improved tack. His questions, and subsequent labeling of the jurors, utilized a well-researched phenomenon called ‘social labeling.’ . . .

Are Acronyms Effective or Alphabet Soup?

15 Sunday Jun 2014

Posted by in Acronyms, Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Direct Examination, Jury Persuasion, Legal Writing, Making Objections, Opening Argument, Oral Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire

≈ Comments Off on Are Acronyms Effective or Alphabet Soup?

Tags

, , , , , ,

DUA: Don’t Use Acronyms, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigators Blog

http://tinyurl.com/p66tcgk

I’m monitoring a criminal trial this week, and at the end of opening statements, the judge looked at the jury and said, ‘Okay, both sides have been referring to ‘AUSAs’ — they know what that means and I know what that means, but I’m guessing that you don’t know that that means?” Head nods from the jury. ‘It means ‘Assistant U.S. Attorney,’ continued the judge, “so please fill that in wherever you hear it.” Good solution? Better than nothing. But it would have been best if both sides would have simply used the title instead of abbreviating it. The tiny amount of additional time it takes to say ‘Assistant U.S. Attorney’ rather than ‘USA’ is well worth it in terms of clarity and understanding.

But some attorneys, experts, and other witnesses continue to love the economy of the acronym. But particularly in spoken communication, and particularly in front of a jury, that economy comes at a cost: meaning lost in translation and increased cognitive workload even when it is translated. Practical persuaders before a lay audience are well advised to avoid acronyms almost entirely. Okay, I say almost entirely — there are some exceptions (and besides ‘Generally Avoid Acronyms’ would have been ‘GAA.’) The few acronyms that ought to still be used are those that have such widespread familiarity that they almost become words in their own right: USA, CNN, or ASAP. In all other cases where the acronyms don’t benefit from automatic translation, the litigator is best off choosing the full expression and not the acronym. This post takes a look at a few reasons, implications, and replacements for trial persuaders looking to lose the alphabet soup of acronyms. . . .

The Secret Of How To Ask For What You Want.

31 Saturday May 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Direct Examination, Jury Persuasion, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Opening Argument, Oral Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire

≈ Comments Off on The Secret Of How To Ask For What You Want.

Tags

, , , , ,

Ask For What You Want, posted by Elliott Wilcox, Trial Theater Blog

http://tinyurl.com/kkrtqwo

Mr. Wilcox’s suggestions on how to verbally ask for what you want can also be translated into a persuasive legal writing technique. The logic works either way. -CCE

How many times a day do you ask judges, clients, or co-workers to do something or to give you something? During any given week, you probably make hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of requests. You ask your co-worker to work on a project, you ask your assistant to handle a client issue, you ask your kids to help with the dishes. . . . The number of requests that you make each week is staggering. But how many of those requests are actually granted? Have you ever had a problem with someone not doing not what you asked?

Why?  You’re a lawyer. Shouldn’t you be the master of persuasion who can get what you want, when you want it, and how you want it, every single time?

Unless your name is ‘Svengali the Master Manipulator,’ chances are that many of your requests are not being granted, or at least not being carried out exactly the way you’d like to see them handled.  But it’s not because your requests are falling on deaf ears.  In fact, your listeners are probably hearing exactly what you’re saying.  The problem is that you’re asking for the wrong thing. . . .

Judges Share Tips With Attorneys About What They Like and What They Don’t.

24 Saturday May 2014

Posted by in Animations, Closing Argument, Jury Selection, Legal Technology, Motion in Limine, Opening Argument, Presentations, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Judges Share Tips With Attorneys About What They Like and What They Don’t.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

5 Key Tips for Trial: Judges Tell Attorneys What They Do and Don’t Like In Court, by Morgan Smith, Cogent Legal Blog

http://cogentlegal.com/blog/2011/05/5-key-tips-for-trial/

How Graphics Were Used In Historic Copyright Case.

22 Thursday May 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Copyright, Exhibits, Intellectual Property, Legal Technology, Opening Argument, Oral Argument, Technology, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on How Graphics Were Used In Historic Copyright Case.

Tags

, , , ,

Graphics for a Historic Copyright Case, by Michael Kelleher, Consent Legal Blog

http://tinyurl.com/q6oa8rt

As you prepare for oral argument in an important hearing, you may realize that you need quick help to create or revise graphics. Today’s blog post comes from this type of scenario, and it has the added interest of coming from a high-profile copyright dispute pending in the Supreme Court. . . .

 

The Strategy of Dissociation – Don’t Go To Trial Without It.

02 Friday May 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Defense Counsel, Direct Examination, Jury Persuasion, Opening Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on The Strategy of Dissociation – Don’t Go To Trial Without It.

Tags

, , , ,

Dissociate (to Separate Bad Image from Good Image in Litigation), by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog

http://bit.ly/1lJsEka

At the start of their game last Sunday, members of the L.A. Clippers ceremonially left their warmup jackets in a heap in center court, and warmed up with their shirts turned inside-out in order to conceal the name and logo of the team. This act came in response to recorded comments by team owner Donald Sterling telling his girlfriend ‘not to bring them [‘black people’] to my games.’ The response by the players was a move of dissociation: a way to say “We are not that,” and to clarify, in no uncertain terms, that the owner’s racism does not represent the team. This need to dissociate – to separate one meaning from another – is common in all communication situations, including those that involve the potential for litigation. Recently, for example, General Motors made the bold move of offering a full and complete apology for its inaction in addressing a long-term problem with its ignition switches, but in subsequent congressional testimony, CEO Mary Barra was careful to draw a distinction between the ‘Old General Motors’ prebankruptcy, and the ‘New General Motors’ that today stands before congress, court, and consumers.

Dissocation plays a role in lower profile cases across the country as well. A range of litigation-relevant situations create a need to communicate that ‘we are not this.’ Like most good persuasive strategies, the notion has its roots in rhetoric, the ancient and modern study of the best available means of influence. But the idea is more than just ivory tower philosophy.  Dissociation also translates into some important practical strategies worth considering by trial attorneys in a number of situations. This post takes a look at the underpinning, as well as the concrete strategies of dissociation. . . .

Powerful PowerPoint Courtroom Presentations.

27 Sunday Apr 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Experts, Jury Persuasion, Legal Technology, Opening Argument, PowerPoint, Presentations, Technology, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Powerful PowerPoint Courtroom Presentations.

Tags

, , , ,

Adding Power to Courtroom Presentations, posted by Elliott Wilcox, TrialTheater Blog

http://tinyurl.com/lddsa49

I ran across this blog today, and I like what I see. PowerPoint is a powerful tool. Like you, I have seen far too many poor presentations.

A good power PointPresentation is an art. It doesn’t just happen. If you have never bothered to find out whether there are guidelines or rules for a good PowerPoint presentation, then you may be guilty, regardless of how witty, entertaining, or persuasive you think you are.

Take some time to read all you can about what makes a good presentation. Do not read your slides. Instead, let them compliment what you say or let them be the “punchline” to your idea. Pay attention to font size. Resist the temptation to fade in, face out, and use dancing graphics that scamper across the screen in every slide.

This post from TrialTheater will tell you how.  Please also note that there are additional posts listed at the end that are also interesting. This is a blog I plan to watch more closely. –CCE

The lights dim, and the first slide appears. You think to yourself, “Oh no, another boring PowerPoint presentation.” The first line of text soars in from the left, each character twirling and dancing across the screen. You count eleven bullet points on the first screen (the shortest of which is sixteen words long). The second slide is even more confusing. The third is a picture of his kids. Fortunately, the room is dark, so no one notices as you start to fall asleep…

Why are most PowerPoint presentations so dreadful? When was the last time you saw a presentation that was actually enhanced by PowerPoint? The reason PowerPoint decimates the effectiveness of most presentations is because the presenters don’t understand how or why to use it. But, when you need to illustrate a point in the courtroom, PowerPoint can be a tremendous addition to your trial skills toolbox. This article will give you tips for improving your presentations, both inside and outside the courtroom. . . . .

Why Isn’t The Judge Listening?

16 Wednesday Apr 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Experts, Jury Persuasion, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Opening Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Why Isn’t The Judge Listening?

Tags

, , , , , ,

Experts: Keep It Comparative, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog

http://tinyurl.com/n3hovpy

The expert has prepared thoroughly for her testimony before the judge. She knows each opinion and every foundation. The outline that counsel developed is all but memorized. But then, as she is about an hour into describing the detailed methods and conclusions, the judge’s eyes are drifting down to the table and the nods of understanding have stopped: He isn’t getting it. In itself, there is nothing in the testimony that is impossible to understand – on the contrary, it is organized and clear. But the judge seems to have disengaged. Instead of tracking with the testimony at each step, he is just hearing detail after detail and letting it wash over him.  And if there were a jury in the room, the problem would be even worse.

What went wrong?  . . . .

Apologizing Even When It’s Not Your Client’s Fault.

30 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Damages, Defense Counsel, Direct Examination, Jury Instructions, Jury Persuasion, Litigation, Making Objections, Opening Argument, Settlement, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Apologizing Even When It’s Not Your Client’s Fault.

Tags

, , , , , ,

Show You’re Sorry, Even When You’re Not at Fault, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog

http://tinyurl.com/ntvjm5r

[A]s we’ve noted before, letting jurors, judges, and opposing parties hear an apology can be effective when you are responsible, or are likely to be found responsible, for at least part of the damage at issue in the case. But what about when you’re not? Does that second kind of “sorry,” meaning “I recognize your loss, but without accepting responsibility for it” create a persuasive advantage as well?

According to some new research, yes, it does. . . .

Like Us, Judges and Juries Get the “Munchies.”

08 Saturday Mar 2014

Posted by in Appellate Judges, Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Defense Counsel, Direct Examination, Exhibits, Experts, Federal Judges, Judges, Jury Persuasion, Law Clerks, Litigation, Making Objections, Opening Argument, Oral Argument, Plaintiff's Counsel, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire, Witnesses

≈ Comments Off on Like Us, Judges and Juries Get the “Munchies.”

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Time Your Arguments to the Judge’s Lunch Breaks (and Adapt to All Decision Makers’ “Cognitive Load”), by  Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator  Blog

http://tinyurl.com/lebleml

It comes as no surprise that a hungry person, be it the judge or members of a jury, find it difficult to concentrate and focus on your client’s case. Long stretches of testimony and argument are hard enough to follow, especially if the case is complex with numerous exhibits and witnesses. Regardless how comfortable the chair, sitting for long periods trying to listen carefully to a case is hard work.

There is more than one way to consider your audience at a trial or hearing. Persuasive argument is one. Excellent trial preparation using technology is another. Considerate and well-timed rest and meal breaks are another tool that can be used to your advantage.

The Rocket Science Blog mentioned in this post can be found at http://tinyurl.com/3dg5e8n. – CCE

Anyone who argues in front of judges knows that human factors can weigh as heavily as the law in determining your judge’s decisions.  But it is still possible at times to be surprised at the degree of influence, as well as the banality of those human factors.  Case in point: lunch and snack breaks.  Recent research discussed in the excellent Not Exactly Rocket Science blog appears to show that judges’ decisions vary as a direct effect of the proximity of their morning snack or lunch break.  In case you are using your morning break or lunch hour to read this post, I’d like to make it worth your while by applying the study findings to the more general issue of your decision-makers’ mental work load and offering some recommendations for anyone who needs to make arguments to a potentially fatigued audience. . . .

Lawyers — First Impressions Stick!

02 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Direct Examination, Exhibits, Experts, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Litigation, Making Objections, Mock Trials, Opening Argument, Plaintiff's Counsel, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire, Witnesses

≈ Comments Off on Lawyers — First Impressions Stick!

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Expect First Impressions to be Carved in Stone, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog

http://tinyurl.com/org7why

Please note additional links on first impressions, overcoming bad impressions, and using visual images to create a first impression at the bottom of this post at the Persuasive Litigator website. -CCE

We’ve all heard the old saying: You never get a second chance to make a first impression. It is true that when meeting someone new, our brain is quickly putting them into a number of categories. Their background, intelligence, friendliness, attitudes, trustworthiness, and a myriad of other aspects of character are all on their way to being locked into some pretty durable assumptions. In a legal setting, where a juror is reacting to a witness on the stand for example, we might want those credibility determinations to be made over time, informed by the full scope of the testimony. But don’t count on it. . . . 

Intolerance Is A Door That Swings Both Ways When Presenting Your Case.

17 Monday Feb 2014

Posted by in Appellate Judges, Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Direct Examination, Federal Judges, Judges, Jury Instructions, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Making Objections, Opening Argument, Oral Argument, Plaintiff's Counsel, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire, Witness Preparation, Witnesses

≈ Comments Off on Intolerance Is A Door That Swings Both Ways When Presenting Your Case.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Account for Ideological Intolerance, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator™

http://tinyurl.com/kovy8wo

It’s Valentine’s time again. It’s a holiday of love, but in the political world, we’re moving out of yet another debt ceiling standoff and there is no love lost between the two sides of the spectrum. Liberals point to yet another, albeit failed, attempt to hold the country’s full faith and credit hostage, while conservatives point to yet another increase in an already staggering national debt. Neither side can understand the values, arguments, and priorities of the other. And that’s just the debt. Add in social welfare programs, marriage equality, and — as the actual sign from an Arizona gun shop above testifies — gun control, and you’ve got a pretty bitter divide. Polling shows that we are politically more ‘tribal’ than ever before. As we’ve noted in earlier posts, liberals and conservatives appear to use their brains differently when assessing risk, and are resistant to applying basic empathy across the political aisles. . . .

Moral Outrage and Jury Persuasion.

15 Wednesday Jan 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Jury Persuasion, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Moral Outrage and Jury Persuasion.

Tags

, , , ,

Simple Jury Persuasion: Anger + Disgust = Moral Outrage, by Douglas Keene, The Jury Room

 http://tinyurl.com/mmuh8fq

[N]ew research shines a light on why moral outrage reactions occur and (just maybe) how one might try to elicit them (if one were wanting to do that sort of thing).

Framing Your Legal Arguments To Persuade.

11 Saturday Jan 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Direct Examination, First Amendment, Jury Instructions, Legal Writing, Making Objections, Opening Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire

≈ Comments Off on Framing Your Legal Arguments To Persuade.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Frame It As “Freedom with Consequences,” by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator

http://tinyurl.com/mvb6qjy

Ducks and Vikings have been prominent recently on the free expression front of the culture wars. The ‘Duck’ would be Duck Dynasty’s reality star Phil Robertson, who’s recent comments on homosexuality and race caused his network, A & E, to briefly suspend him from the show. The ‘Viking’ would be former Minnesota Vikings punter Chris Kluwe, who was released by the team after controversy following an editorial he wrote in favor of marriage equality. While Kluwe lost his job and Robertson kept his, the similarity in the cases is that both were framed in the public sphere as a question of free expression. But it is less the question of whether Robertson and Kluwe have free speech, but whether they have freedom from the employment consequences of that speech.

Courtroom Body Language – How to Read It and Use It In Court.

04 Saturday Jan 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Direct Examination, Experts, Judges, Jury Selection, Opening Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire, Witness Preparation

≈ Comments Off on Courtroom Body Language – How to Read It and Use It In Court.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Tips For Reading And Managing Courtroom Body Language, by Legal Skills Prof, Legal Skills Prof Blog

http://tinyurl.com/k7uxpr7

The most brilliant trial attorneys seem to have a natural instinct for reading people, knowing intuitively what a nod from a juror or glance from a judge implies. For the rest of us, there’s this handy cheat sheet that breaks down some of the most common body language exhibited in the courtroom. You can use it to modulate your own behavior, train your client, or gain additional insight into opposing counsel, judge and jury.

Better Trial Messages to the Jury.

02 Thursday Jan 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Jury Instructions, Opening Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire

≈ Comments Off on Better Trial Messages to the Jury.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Chunk Your Trial Message, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator

http://tinyurl.com/jvum7kj

Dr. Broda-Bahm provides excellent ideas for litigators on how to “chunk” their trial messages. -CCE

 Give me the bite-sized version, break it down into pieces, and tell it to me step-by-step. The brain loves to segment, and the process known as “chunking” seems to be a central part of how we recognize patterns, manage information, and form new insights. A recent perspective on the process is articulated by Cambridge neuroscientist Daniel Bor in his book, The Ravenous Brain (2012).

[I]t is one thing for the attorney to get that structure, and it is another thing for her listeners to get it just as well. Litigators and other communicators often believe that they’re breaking things down based on a clear, explicit, and meaningful structure, but their audience instead simply experiences a continuous and unbroken flow of information or arguments. Here are a few rules of thumb for making sure you’re actually chunking when you think you’re chunking:

  • It has to be simple (which usually means flat, without substructure, and limited to a manageable number of main points).

  • It has to be explicit (which usually means actually saying something like, “First point,” “Second point,” and “Third point”).

  • It usually should be previewed (“Tell them before you tell them,” unless you having a strategic reason for preserving a surprise).

Sharpen Trial Advocacy Skills.

28 Saturday Dec 2013

Posted by in Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Direct Examination, Jury Selection, Making Objections, Opening Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques, Witness Preparation

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

The Trial Lawyers Library, trialtheater blog

http://www.trialtheater.com/wordpress/the-trial-lawyers-library/

A trial lawyer’s list of recommended books to develop trial advocacy skills. Although some of the titles may surprise you, each has an intended purpose directly tied to trial advocacy. – CCE

 

 

Show the Jury How to Fill in the Verdict Form in Closing Argument

19 Tuesday Nov 2013

Posted by in Closing Argument, Legal Technology, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Show the Jury How to Fill in the Verdict Form in Closing Argument

Tags

, , , ,

How to Guide the Jury Through the Verdict Form in Closing Argument, by Michael Kelleher, Cogent Legal Blog
http://cogentlegal.com/blog/2013/11/verdict-form/

While I can see how persuasive this would be, I am curious as to whether a judge would rule against this presentation if opposing counsel filed an appropriate motion in limine. CCE

The Cardinal Rules of Trial Advocacy

05 Tuesday Nov 2013

Posted by in Admissibility, Closing Argument, Court Rules, Cross-Examination, Direct Examination, Evidence, Making Objections, Opening Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on The Cardinal Rules of Trial Advocacy

Tags

, , , ,

Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Trial Procedure and Tactics, by James A. Tanford, Indiana University School Of Law

http://www.perma.cc/0WZumCVR9Ao