One of the most fascinating challenges in trial persuasion is deciding whether to take jurors back in time. When a case involves conduct from a decade ago—or even just a few years ago—the cultural lens through which people saw the world was different. What was acceptable in 2012 might look outrageous in 2025. What seemed overlooked in the pre–Me Too era became headline-worthy by 2017. And even that lens has shifted again since. As trial consultants, we often rely on a trial graphic to give jurors context. A good trial graphic can reset their perspective, reminding them what “normal” looked like when the conduct occurred. But like all powerful persuasion tools, this strategy has both pluses and minuses. Why Taking Jurors Back Can Work 1. Context Creates Fairness Jurors want to be fair. They know they’re judging past conduct, and they’re often open to guidance. A trial graphic that situates an event in its proper era can be invaluable.
In an ideal courtroom, decisions are rendered based solely on facts and evidence. However, real-world trials often reveal a different narrative—one where emotion, bias, and human psychology significantly influence outcomes. This divergence highlights the crucial role of jury consultants in navigating the intricate interplay between fact and emotion.
Most of the work that a trial consulting firm like A2L does for its clients takes place in civil cases. However, criminal cases also present unique challenges for trial lawyers and for trial consultants, and some of our most fascinating cases over the years have been criminal cases.
by Ryan H. Flax (Former) Managing Director, Litigation Consulting A2L Consulting We strongly advocate that counsel must use a visual presentation to support his or her oral argument at trial (and anywhere they need to be persuasive). This most commonly happens during opening statements and closing arguments at trial and the dominant format for such presentations is PowerPoint – a very good tool. However, like cutting your own hair or doing your own dental work, we must again caution you that you must really know what you’re doing because your case may depend on it. On January 22, 2015, the Supreme Court of the State of Washington published its opinion in State v. Walker, overturning the State Prosecutor’s conviction of an accused murderer because the attorney went too far with his demonstrative evidence in closing. A murderer has potentially been freed because, in the Court’s view, counsel was inflammatory in his presentation and “appealed to passion and prejudice” of the jury. Certainly as zealous advocates we do want to appeal to the passion of jurors on some level. We need their emotions to be in sync with the law and evidence, but what might be too much so as to prejudice the proceedings? Let’s explore the Washington Supreme Court’s opinion to see.
As a lawyer, you will likely come across some high-profile clients in your career. Representing celebrities in court can be challenging, but it can also be rewarding. However, there are some unique considerations that you must keep in mind when dealing with these types of clients.
by Ryan H. Flax (Former) Managing Director, Litigation Consulting A2L Consulting It has just been reported that prosecution counsel in the criminal trial against George Zimmerman is objecting to the defense’s use of a computer animation depicting the scene of the fatal confrontation between Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin. It appears the defense wants to give the jurors some perspective on the scene and, perhaps, show why Zimmerman was justified in doing what he did.
Another reason why televised trials are so intriguing is the opportunity they provide for the public to witness the pursuit of justice. People have an inherent desire for fairness and accountability, and televised trials allow them to see firsthand how the legal system upholds these principles. Whether it's a murder trial or a high-stakes corporate lawsuit, viewers can observe the process of presenting evidence, cross-examination, and the deliberation of the jury. This transparency fosters a sense of trust in the legal system and reassures the public that justice is being served.
Thomas F. Carlucci Partner Foley & Lardner LLP John E. Turlais Senior Counsel Foley & Lardner LLP Ryan H. Flax (Former) Managing Director, Litigation Consulting A2L Consulting
by Kenneth J. Lopez, J.D. CEO & Founder A2L Consulting I created my first trial exhibit while working for the U.S. government in 1992 as a clerk in the Eastern District of Virginia. Two assistant U.S. attorneys were having a hard time explaining why a witness was able to see the defendant in a drug bust in spite of a four-foot wall. I created a simple map exhibit using my Mac and they were thrilled.
Share: