14 Friday Apr 2017
Posted in Jury Persuasion, Trial Lawyers, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Litigation Tip – Balancing Emotion and Logic.
Human Nature: “Facts are White Noise & Emotions Rule” & Why We Continue to Believe Objectively False Things, by Paul Luvera, Plaintiff Trial Lawyer Tips
Does your head or your heart make your decisions? Are you sure? While your argument, evidence, and testimony may be perfectly reasoned and logical, how does it rank on a positive or negative on an emotional scale or preconceived beliefs? -CCE
07 Saturday Jan 2017
Posted in Juror Questionnaires, Jury Selection, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Voir Dire and The Internet – The Litigator’s Way of Getting To Know You.
Tags
Dennis Elias, Dr. Ken Broda-Brahm, Internet, Jury Selection, Litigation Strategies Inc., Social media, Voir Dire
Getting Up Close and Personal: Using Social Media in Jury Selection, by Dennis Elias, Litigation Strategy, Inc.
Are you more candid online than in person? Apparently, it’s true, which makes the Internet and social media a boon to litigators. Here’s why, how, and where to draw the ethical line before you go too far. -CCE
29 Tuesday Nov 2016
Posted in Juror Questionnaires, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Picking A Jury? Read This First.
Tags
Dr. Ken Broda-Brahm, Juror Bias, Juror Questionnaires, Jury Selection, Persuasive Litigator, Voir Dire
Get Better Answers: Top 7 Posts on Supplemental Juror Questionnaires, by Dr. Ken Broda-Brahm, Persuasive Litigator
Well, here’s a treat. Seven posts all in one on jury selection and jury questionnaires. How do you find the right jurors to hear and decide your case? Some people have a natural tendency to tell you whatever you want to hear. They are just trying to be helpful. Some potential jurors simply don’t want to be there, and hope to be dismissed.
You have little time to sort this out. It is time to become an expert in human psychology. –CCE
If I had to pick one trial reform that has the best chance of promoting reliable information in voir dire and in decreasing reliance on demographic biases, it would be the greater use of supplemental juror questionnaires. A well-designed questionnaire allows you to uncover the attitudes that are most relevant to bias in a given case context. Here are seven posts laying out the reasons why.
21 Wednesday Oct 2015
Posted in Implied Bias, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Understand Group Psychology Patterns for Winning Trial Strategy.
Tags
Group Psychology, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Ken Lopez, The Litigation Consulting Report, Voir Dire, Wilfred Bion
Group Psychology, Voir Dire, Jury Selection and Jury Deliberations, by Ken Lopez, The Litigation Consulting Report
Since first being exposed to the group psychology work of Wilfred Bion 15 years ago, I’ve been completely fascinated by it. I think his theories perfectly explain the behavior of every group that I’ve ever encountered. From boards that I sit on to groups on reality TV shows, they all behave in the same predictable ways, especially when placed under pressure. . . . [Emphasis added.]
03 Friday Jul 2015
Posted in Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Voir Dire and Racism.
Tags
Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Jury Persuasion, Persuasive Litigator Blog, Racism, Trial Tips & Techniques, Voir Dire
Don’t Treat Racism as Just a Belief, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog
As of posting time, seven African-American churches have burned down since the racially motivated murders in Emanuel African Methodist Church in Charleston, South Carolina two weeks ago. One of those fires may have been caused by lightning, but there’s a concern that others may have been caused by a belief – namely, racism toward African-Americans. But that understanding of racism as a conscious and pointed belief can limit our understanding of the full spectrum of the bias. . . .
30 Tuesday Jun 2015
Posted in Exhibits, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Litigation, Opening Argument, Technology, Timelines, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Litigator’s Honey Pot – Top 9 Recent Litigation Posts From Ken Lopez.
Tags
Ken Lopez, Litigation, Persuasive Trial Strategy, The A2L's Litigation Consulting Report Blog, Trial Tips & Techniques, Voir Dire
Top 9 Litigation Consulting Articles from Q2-2015, posted by Ken Lopez, The A2L’s Litigation Consulting Report Blog
What luck! Ken Lopez kindly has gathered 9 of his recent top posts. There’s a little something for anyone who practices litigation – voir dire and jury selection, trial graphics, persuasive opening arguments, a discussion of the Reptile Trial Strategy, and more. Thank you, Ken! -CCE
It’s been another great quarter of publishing blog articles on A2L’s Litigation Consulting Report Blog. . . . Since we post 2-3 articles every week, I’ve heard from our readers that it is sometimes hard to keep up with the latest articles. To help remedy that and organize the information better, roughly six times a year we publish a mini-retrospective at the end of the quarter, at the end of a year and/or to celebrate blogging milestones.
This quarter, I’m listing the top nine articles from April, May and June of 2015 reverse sorted by the number of times each article was read. This way, this list serves as an excellent reader-curated guide to the very best articles we have published recently. . . .
10 Wednesday Jun 2015
Posted in Implied Bias, Jury Selection, Peremptory Challenges, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on How Juror With Ties To Defendants’ Law Firm Stayed On The Jury.
Motion to Strike Potential Juror Represented by Law Firm Involved Denied, by Daniel E. Cummins, TortTalk Blog
(Source for Mr. Cummins post: “Panel Upholds Decision Not to Strike Juror With Ties to Firm” by P.J. D’Annunzio of The Legal Intelligencer (June 3, 2015).)
http://www.torttalk.com/2015/06/motion-to-strike-potential-juror.html
In the non-precedential Pennsylvania Superior Court case of DeFrancesco v. Lehigh Valley Health Network, No. 742 EDA 2014 (Pa. Super. May 26, 2015 Panella, Olson, Fitzgerald, J.J.) (slip op. by Fitzgerald, J.), the appellate court affirmed a trial court’s decision not to strike a juror from a medical malpractice case during voir dire even though the juror was a client of the same firm representing defendants in the case. . . .
22 Sunday Mar 2015
Posted in Apps, iPhones, Jury Selection, Legal Technology, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Jury Selection – There’s An App For That.
iPad App: iJuror – Jury Selection at Your Fingertips, by Travis Francis, Legal Productivity
Gone are the days of using sticky notes and legal pads to assist with voir dire and jury selection. Now from the convenience of your iPad, attorneys are able to track their jury pools and organize notes throughout a trial by downloading iJuror.
iJuror is a jury selection app that helps attorneys select from a jury pool by maintaining juror information and responses during the jury selection process. . . .
14 Saturday Mar 2015
Posted in Civil Rights, Hate Crimes, Jury Selection, Research, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Useful Information for Jury Selection?
Tags
beSpacific Blog., Civil Rights, Criminal Law, Hate Crimes, Jury Selection, Sabrina I. Pacifici, Voir Dire
Study Finds Racial, Ethnic Divide In Attention To Crime News, by Sabrina I. Pacifici, BeSpacific Blog
http://www.bespacific.com/study-finds-racial-ethnic-divide-in-attention-to-crime-news/
‘Crime consistently ranks as one of the most followed and discussed topics by the public, and it receives more attention in local news media than almost any other subject. A recent Pew Research Center report reinforces these findings but also suggests that certain groups of residents pay closer attention to local crime than others in the three cities studied. A difference that particularly stands out is between racial and ethnic groups. . . .’
13 Saturday Dec 2014
Posted 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.
Simple Jury Persuasion: Gender And Message Delivery And Framing, by Douglas Keene, The Jury Room Blog
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.) . . .
14 Friday Nov 2014
Posted in Implied Bias, Juror Impeachment, Jury Selection, Opening Argument, Peremptory Challenges, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Should Attorneys, Not Judges, Conduct Voir Dire At Trial?
Tags
Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Juries, Peremptory Challenges, Persuasive Litigator Blog, Trial Tips & Techniques, Voir Dire
Let the Lawyers Ask: Five Reasons for Attorney-Conducted Voir Dire, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator
You may think that trial attorneys are the only ones who conduct voir dire at trial. That is not necessarily the case. Not all judges agree, especially in federal court. Dr. Broda-Bahm argues here that the parties’ lawyers should have this role. -CCE
Ever had the experience of asking someone to ask someone else something on your behalf? It’s like a sixth-grader’s attempt to find out if someone likes you. Sometimes you need a little plausible deniability but, in most cases now, it’s easier and more direct to just ask on your own. And that is pretty much what attorneys want in voir dire. It is nice for the judge to explain the procedures and deal with some of the more obvious hardship and cause challenges, but I think it’s safe to say that every trial lawyer wants the chance to ask their own questions in voir dire. Unfortunately, in some states and in most federal courtrooms, attorney-conducted oral voir dire is either limited or nonexistent.
The judges in those courtrooms, however, have discretion, and can allow attorney-conducted oral voir dire if they think the case or the circumstances call for it. So, when attorneys do have an opening to argue for their own chance at the lectern during voir dire, how do they make the case? If the judge is firmly convinced that it’s wasted time or an unwelcome opportunity for lawyers to ask panelists to prejudge the case, then nothing is going to change that judge’s mind. But if judges are on the fence, then a joint request from the parties, along with a few good reasons, might be enough to sway them. This post offers five reasons, along with some supporting research, that could buttress a brief or an oral argument in favor of attorney-conducted oral voldir dire. . . .
29 Friday Aug 2014
Posted in Criminal Law, Jury Instructions, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Murder, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Listen To The Jurors.
Tags
Capivated: The Trials of Pamela Smart, Documentary, HBO, Juror 13, Jurors, Jury Trials, Media Coverage, Murder, Post-Trial, Reasonable Doubt, To Die For
Listen to Jurors, Especially to Juror #13 From Pamela Smart Trial. by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, The Persuasive Litigator
There is a new documentary in current rotation on HBO and it’s one that trial lawyers and other legal junkies will want to watch. Captivated: The Trials of Pamela Smart provides a detailed look at the 1991 trial of the New Hampshire school employee who was tried and convicted for accessory to murder in a case that later become the inspiration for the movie To Die For starring Nicole Kidman. According to prosecutors, Smart seduced one of the students and then recruited him to murder her husband. What separates Captivated from other sensationalized post-trial documentaries is that it takes a very informed and critical look at the media’s influence on trials, and also includes a very unique running commentary from one of the jurors, number 13, who provides her own reactions to the case as it unfolded: real-time comments that she spoke into her own tape recorder after every trial day. The result ends up providing a remarkable view into the continuous reactions of a sitting juror. As O.J. Simpson prosecutor Marcia Clark remarked in a review in Forbes, ‘The insights provided by this articulate, intelligent juror are the most fascinating, and at the same time unsettling, part of the story.’
Fascinating, because what you’re hearing is a conscientious and thoughtful juror attempting to work through the testimony as it is presented. Unsettling, because it is clear that the media along with the force of a popular presumption of guilt also played a role in this case. Commenting on a ‘media circus’ that made her and the other jurors ‘feel like a bug in a glass jar,’ she nonetheless tries to reach a verdict free from that pressure. Whether she and the other jurors succeeded is one of the central questions posed by the documentary, and viewers are able to draw their own conclusions. As I watched it the other night, a few thoughts occurred to me that carry relevance not only for that jury trial, but for most or all jury trials.
15 Sunday Jun 2014
Posted 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
Abbreviations, Acronyms, Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Jury Persuasion, Legal Writing, Persuasive Litigators Blog, Trial Tips & Techniques
DUA: Don’t Use Acronyms, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigators Blog
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. . . .
31 Saturday May 2014
Posted 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
Closing Argument, Elliott Wilcox, Legal Writing, Opening Argument, Trial Theater Blog, Trial Tips & Techniques
Ask For What You Want, posted by Elliott Wilcox, Trial Theater Blog
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. . . .
08 Thursday May 2014
Posted in Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Include Juror Background Profiles For Strong Trial Strategy.
Tags
Background Questionnaire, Juries, Juror Profile, Litigation Insights, Merrie Jo Pitera, Mock Jurors, Ph.D-CEO, Voir Dire
Jury Research Education Series | Developing a Juror Profile: Having a Strong Foundation, by Merrie Jo Pitera, Ph.D-CEO, Litigation Insights
Ultimately, a panel of jurors will decide your case. Knowing as much as possible about those jurors is therefore a critical element of trial strategy. Developing a juror profile you can requires gathering information about the characteristics of pro-plaintiff/pro-defense jurors in a scientifically valid manner. Just asking staff at your firm or a group of friends what they think doesn’t give you reliable information. The most reliable tool to develop your profile is based on the background questionnaire used in your jury research projects. In this blog post, we discuss how results from a questionnaire can serve as the foundation for your juror profile and how to design a well-constructed background questionnaire that gives you information you can trust. . . .
08 Saturday Mar 2014
Posted 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
Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Judges, Juries, Lunch and Snack Breaks, Persuasive Litigator Blog, Persuasive Trial Strategy, Rocket Science Blog, Trial Tips & Techniques, Trials
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
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. . . .
02 Sunday Mar 2014
Posted 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
Bad Impressions, Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, First Impressions, Mock Trials, Persuasive Litigator Blog, Trial Tips & Techniques, Visual Images, Witnesses
Expect First Impressions to be Carved in Stone, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog
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. . . .
17 Monday Feb 2014
Posted 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
Conservatives, Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Judges, Juries, Liberals, Persuasive Litigator, Politics, Trial Tips and Techniques
Account for Ideological Intolerance, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator™
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. . . .
10 Monday Feb 2014
Posted in Jury Instructions, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Peremptory Challenges, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Jury Consultant’s Voir Dire Tips.
Tags
Edward P. Schwartz, Hung Juries, Jury Consulting, Jury Selection, Jury Trials, Lawyers USA, Peremptory Challenges, Supplemental Juror Questionnaires, THE JURY BOX, Voir Dire, Voir Dire Questionnaires
Indirect Questions Reap Most Information in Oral Voir Dire, by Edward P. Schwartz, THE JURY BOX
In reviewing the traffic on my website recently, I was struck by how much more often one particular article was accessed than any other. I used to write a column on trial strategy for Lawyers USA (formerly Lawyers Weekly USA), and this particular article on voir dire strategy from 2006 seems to be very popular, even today. So, in the spirit of giving the public what it wants, here is that article in its entirety.
09 Sunday Feb 2014
Posted in Class Actions, Corporate Law, Finance and Banking Law, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Litigation, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire, White Collar Crime
≈ Comments Off on How Do Jurors In A Recession Really Feel About The Financial Industry?
Tags
Banking Industry, Elizabeth Babbitt M.A., Financial Institutions, For The Defense Magazine, High-Interest Loans, Housing Crash, Jill Leibold Ph.D., Juror Bias, Jurors, Litigation Insights, Louis A. Huber III, Mortgage Foreclosure, Recession
Take This To The Bank: Jurors’ Evaluations Of Financial Industry Defendants During A Recession, by Jill Leibold Ph.D., Director, Jury Research, Elizabeth Babbitt, M.A., Consultant, and Louis A. Huber III, of Schlee, Huber, McMullen and Krause, LITIGATION INSIGHTS
[I]n the following article, published in DRI’s, For the Defense magazine, we wanted to evaluate biases in the way jurors would view banking or finance defendants. Given that almost all of Americans have felt they’ve been affected by the most recent recession, we conducted a study to gauge those positive or negative attitudes toward the financial industry as well as piece together how these issues could shape jurors’ perceptions toward banking and finance defendants come trial. . . .
11 Saturday Jan 2014
Posted 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
A&E, Chris Kluwe, Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Duck Dynasty, Free Speech, Minnesota Vikings, Persuasive Litigator, Phil Robertson, Trial Tips and Techniques
Frame It As “Freedom with Consequences,” by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator
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.
04 Saturday Jan 2014
Posted 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
Attorneys, Body Language, Expert Witnesses, Judges, Legal Skills Prof, Legal Skills Prof Blog, Trial Tips and Techniques, Witnesses
Tips For Reading And Managing Courtroom Body Language, by Legal Skills Prof, Legal Skills Prof Blog
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.
02 Thursday Jan 2014
Posted in Closing Argument, Jury Instructions, Opening Argument, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Better Trial Messages to the Jury.
Tags
Cambridge, Chunking, Closing Argument, Daniel Bor, Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Opening Argument, Persuasive Litigator, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
Chunk Your Trial Message, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator
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).
01 Friday Nov 2013
Posted in Experts, Jury Instructions, Jury Selection, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on American Jury System – The Optimal Jury Trial Videos
Favorite Thing: American Jury System – The Optimal Jury Trial Videos, submitted by Susie Macpherson of NJP Litigation Consulting, ASTC Member Trial Consultants from The Jury Expert
http://perma.cc/0Z3TkwVQy6Z
Impressive collection of resources for judges and attorneys. CCE
These videos are a great resource for attorneys and judges who want to investigate any of these topics, or for those who need ‘hands on’ examples to encourage other judges and attorneys to implement new procedures.”
22 Tuesday Oct 2013
Posted in Admissibility, Court Rules, Evidence, Expert Witnesses, Forensic Evidence, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire
≈ Comments Off on Experts, Admissibility, and Rule 705
Who Made You The Expert?: Rule 705 & The Admissibility of Underlying Facts or Data, by Evidence ProfBlogger, EvidenceProfBlog
http://bit.ly/1a085YM
The Researching Paralegal 
You must be logged in to post a comment.