The Litigation Consulting Report

Cognitive biases are a natural part of being human, and jurors are not exempt from these biases when serving in a court of law. The impact of these biases on how jurors receive and interpret expert testimony cannot be underestimated, as it can ultimately shape the outcome of a trial.

As the largest and most diverse generation in American history, millennials are having a significant impact on many aspects of society, including the legal system. One area where this impact is particularly noticeable is in the jury pool. As more and more millennials enter the pool of potential jurors, they are bringing with them a unique set of experiences, values, and attitudes that can influence the outcome of trials and the way that juries function.

Jury selection is a critical part of the legal process, and the jury summons form plays a significant role in this process. While many may overlook this form, it actually holds valuable information that can greatly influence the outcome of a trial.

One of the key considerations in data-driven jury selection is the identification of favorable jurors based on their background and beliefs. This involves analyzing a wide range of data, such as demographic information, voting history, social media activity, and even purchasing habits. By delving into these details, lawyers can gain valuable insights into potential jurors' decision-making processes and biases.

In today's rapidly evolving society, the composition of juries is constantly changing, mirroring the shifts in social dynamics. The advent of social media and its pervasive influence on our daily lives has brought about significant transformations in both jury selection and the conduct of voir dire.

by Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting 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. I think the author Robert Young captures the essence of the group dynamics model Bion describes when he says, "My experience was that, sure enough, from time to time each group would fall into a species of madness and start arguing and forming factions over matters which, on later reflection, would not seem to justify so much passion and distress. More often than not, the row would end up in a split or in the departure or expulsion of one or more scapegoats." I've written about Bion's work before in 5 Signs of a Dysfunctional Trial Team (and What to Do About It) and When a Good Trial Team Goes Bad: The Psychology of Team Anxiety. These articles and Young's article from the Human Nature Review provide a good introduction to Bion's group dynamics model. Here are the key aspects of Bion’s group dynamics model. In Bion's framework, groups are always functioning in one of two modes. Either they are working or they are operating dysfunctionally (he called this later state the Basic Assumption State). Both groups rely on a leader, and the members interact with the leader in predictable ways. In the working group, the group gets things done. They understand the meaning of the task at hand and cooperate to get it done without unnecessary emotional distress. In the dysfunctional group, much less gets done, and the group moves through a progressively worse set of dysfunctional behaviors triggered by some anxiety or pressure. Initially, the dysfunctional group will attempt to look to the leader to make the anxiety go away by treating the leader as a type of wise superhuman. If that fails to make the anxiety go away, two or more members of the group will begin to conspire to replace the leader or form a new group, If that does not work, fighting and/or departures will begin. All of this is subconscious, but once you understand the patterns, you'll see them everywhere. Knowing where you are in the process of dysfunction can be one of the most valuable tools a manager, leader or consultant can have. I bet you can guess another group that behaves in predictable ways that I have an interest in — that's right, juries. And they certainly behave in ways that solidly fit Bion's group dynamics model. If you understand how this works, you can use this knowledge during jury selection. Our team has seen thousands of juries deliberate. That's unusual since jury deliberations are secret. Of course, when we see them deliberating, often four juries at a time, it is behind the one-way mirrors of mock trial facilities. The behavior we see from jury to jury is remarkably consistent. We've detailed some of these behaviors in the article 10 Things Every Mock Juror Ever Has Said and the webinar and the podcast 12 Things Every Mock Juror Ever Has Said. Furthermore, an article by A2L's Managing Director of Jury Consulting, Dr. Laurie Kuslansky, called 10 Ways to Spot Your Jury Foreman is a useful background piece for those interested in this area of study.

As a legal professional, it is crucial to ask the right questions during voir dire to ensure that you select your best jury. One way to prepare for this is through a mock trial.

By Jim Grandone Special Guest Author Grandone Media Strategies A lawyer I worked with recently summed up the love-hate relationship between lawyers and the news media as follows, “We spend 50 percent of the time trying to get publicity about our firm and the other 50 percent worrying about what the press is going to write about us.” It’s true that in some states, there are constraints on what a lawyer can say about a pending case. But in general, a lawyer is allowed to discuss the basics --such as the claim, the offense or defense involved, and (except where prohibited), the identity of the persons involved; any information on the public record; the fact that an investigation is in progress; and the scheduling or result of any step in litigation. Why then are lawyers so reluctant to speak to reporters? After all, these allowable types of comments – and many states permit lawyers to say even more about their cases – give lawyers considerable leeway to talk to reporters. So you can go ahead and promote whatever your firm is doing that is admirable, successful or high-profile. Reporters already have instant electronic access to what you have filed, so why not emphasize the most important messages? Do not expect the reporter to communicate your key message for you! You can reach your most important audience outside the courtroom by simply reiterating what you have already said in court documents, even if it is only a summary. Develop a message and clearly communicate the key points of the case.

When it comes to jury selection, many lawyers are eager to win voir dire. After all, this is their chance to shape the jury pool and hopefully secure a favorable verdict for their client. However, there are several reasons why trying to "win" voir dire may not be the best strategy. Here are five reasons why you might want to reconsider your approach: