The Litigation Consulting Report

Like the well-known character Pinocchio, some lawyers and their trial graphics experts are not always truthful. Unfortunately, their noses don't grow to reveal their deceit, so it's up to you to identify when they're being dishonest. This article aims to equip you with the tools to do just that—spot those who mislead with charts and trial graphics and, ideally, expose them in court. Alternatively, you could hire Persuadius to save time and energy, allowing you to focus on what you excel at. Clarity and accuracy are crucial in a court of law, but trial graphics can be manipulated to distort the truth. Misleading charts and visual data presentations are often used to sway the judgment of judges and jurors, making it essential for legal professionals to be vigilant. Here are the top 10 tactics your opponent might use to mislead the judge and jury through trial graphics trickery, and how you can spot them. 1. Misleading Scales and Axes on Trial Graphics One of the most common tricks in chart manipulation involves altering the scales and axes. By stretching or compressing the y-axis, a slight difference in data can appear much larger or smaller than it actually is. For instance, a bar chart with a truncated y-axis (which doesn't start at zero) can make minor differences appear significant. Alternatively, using non-uniform intervals on the axes can distort the perception of trends, making data points look disproportionately close or far apart. Below, the creators of this chart wanted to create the impression that iOS has more market than Android. That's not true. I don't understand why, but it's not true. They achieve this by leaving off the bottom 75% of data and indicating that Android holds 85% (at least according to this chart) of the market. The actual numbers are roughly 71% (Android) versus 28% (iOS). Defensive Tip: Always check if the scale is consistent and fair. A quick glance at the axis values and intervals can reveal if something is amiss.

PowerPoint does funny things to people. For some, it is an amazingly accessible creative space to deliver important messages powerfully and persuasively (see Wait, Why is Powerpoint Cool Now). For others, it is a place to advertise how little they know about persuasion science. Think of this article as a fun challenge reminiscent of the games found on cereal boxes from your childhood. Your task: spot the persuasion-killing mistakes on the slide above, then compare them to the ones I've highlighted below. I've already embedded numerous persuasion pitfalls in the text, making it easier for you to identify them. Let's see how many you can uncover and elevate your persuasion game. Hopefully, this slide doesn't resemble your Trial Graphics/Litigation Graphics. If it does, you should contact me or press the request conflicts check button in the corner. In any case, I hope this article helps you and helps elevate the art of persuasion.

Discover how utilizing litigation graphics can significantly impact the outcome of a trial and captivate the jury's attention. The Power of Visual Communication in the Courtroom In the courtroom, visual communication plays a crucial role in presenting complex information in a clear and compelling manner. By using litigation graphics, attorneys can effectively convey their arguments and evidence to the jury, helping them understand the case more easily. Visuals have a powerful impact on human perception and memory. Studies have shown that juries remember information better when it is presented visually rather than verbally. This makes litigation graphics an essential tool for attorneys to enhance the jury's understanding and retention of key facts and arguments. Additionally, visuals can evoke emotions and create a stronger connection with the audience. By incorporating compelling images, charts, and diagrams, attorneys can engage the jury on a deeper level and make a lasting impression. The power of visual communication in the courtroom cannot be underestimated. Litigation graphics provide attorneys with a powerful tool to convey complex information effectively, enhance understanding and retention, and create a lasting impact on the jury. Types of Litigation Graphics Attorneys can use various types of litigation graphics to support their arguments and present evidence. Some common examples include: - Timelines: Litigation timelines effectively illustrate the chronological sequence of events and highlight key dates and milestones in the case. - Charts and Graphs: Litigation charts and graphs are useful for presenting statistical data, comparisons, and trends. They can make complex information more accessible and understandable for the jury.

PROS: PowerPoint is a versatile tool that many lawyers use for creating trial graphics. It can be used to create visual aids that can help present arguments in a clear and concise way. While there are many tools available for creating trial graphics, PowerPoint is a popular choice due to its ease of use, flexibility, and accessibility. Using PowerPoint for trial graphics can help simplify complex concepts and make arguments more compelling. For instance, you can use PowerPoint to create timelines, charts, graphs, and other visuals that can help illustrate key points. This is particularly important in cases where multiple parties, complex facts, or technical details need to be presented to the jury.

As a trial lawyer, your main goal is to persuade the judge or jury that your client’s side of the story is the most compelling one. One of the most effective ways to do this is through trial graphics. These visual aids can help you convey complex information in a way that is easy to understand and memorable. In this article, we’ll explore the science of storytelling and how trial graphics can help you tell a compelling narrative. The Power of Storytelling Humans have been telling stories for thousands of years. From cave paintings to novels, stories have always played an essential role in our lives. But why do we love stories so much? The answer lies in our brain. Research has shown that when we hear a story, our brain releases dopamine, a chemical associated with pleasure and reward. This makes us feel good and helps us remember the information better. In addition to making us feel good, stories also help us make sense of the world around us. They provide a framework for understanding complex information and help us remember important details. This is why stories are such a powerful tool in the courtroom.

Sometimes I fear that my tips for trial lawyers might be perceived as self-serving. They're not, I promise, but I understand how someone could think that. Well, for at least for the duration of this article, don't take my word for it, please. Every day, we work with some of the world's best trial lawyers. I learn a lot from watching how the very best prepare for trial, and it is a pleasure to share what I witness with other great trial lawyers. Today, I'm presenting a collection of videos (some are from A2L clients, and some are not), trial presentation examples, sample litigation graphics, and other instances where trial lawyers and other great presenters lead by example. In this article, I'm not just asking you to accept what I say. I am asking you to watch your peers show or tell how to best persuade judges, jurors, and people in general. Here are twelve tips (really, there are hundreds of best practices embedded in here) from some of the world's best trial lawyers and presenters: Persuasive Storytelling Matters! Watch three accomplished trial lawyers explain why: https://www.a2lc.com/blog/three-top-trial-lawyers-tell-us-why-storytelling-at-trial-is-so-important Litigation Graphics should not be created by trial counsel - ever. These examples show why: https://www.a2lc.com/blog/excellent-litigation-graphics-in-the-impeachment-trial Litigation Graphics - It's no longer about reading bullet points. Jurors simply expect more!: https://www.a2lc.com/blog/still-think-persuasion-is-about-talking-while-showing-bullet-points-and-not-litigation-graphics Love him, hate him, respect him, disrespect him - whatever - this politician presents better than most trial lawyers (the linked articles are a trial lawyer presentation goldmine!): https://www.a2lc.com/blog/netanyahu-persuades-and-presents-better-than-most-trial-lawyers

Finally. High-quality litigation graphics made an appearance at the impeachment trial. If you are a trial lawyer or you help trial lawyers, this article is a must-read, because it will help you see the future and help you persuade better. I've published three recent articles about the impeachment hearings/trial and the litigation graphics and technology used: 5 Litigation Graphics Lessons from the Impeachment Hearings Who Won the Impeachment Trial Initial Opening Statements? Impeachment Hearings Provide Trial Technology Lessons I thought those three articles would be my last on the subject, and then something impressive happened. Objectively effective litigation graphics were (finally) used on Day 6, and they offer a look into the future for all trial lawyers. The first five days of the impeachment trial left me feeling sad for those rare few of us who are experts in the art and science of litigation graphics. For the most part, the PowerPoints used were better than nothing but fell far short of maximizing persuasion (based on current persuasion science). They looked like what lawyers can create on their own, what you see at most trials, and what you see in most corporate conference rooms. They were ugly and flawed. Again, though, they were better than nothing. When defense counsel presented opening statements on Day 1 of the trial and used no visuals, I was confused. I know the background of some of these lawyers and have worked with some of them. I know they know better. It was disheartening. And then came the opening defense arguments on Day 6, and finally, excellent litigation graphics made an appearance. As I've said before, none of my articles are political in any way. I am only commenting on the quality of the litigation graphics presentations and technology used. I'm leaving the content entirely alone. Nevertheless, I know it's hard to separate the litigation graphics from the messenger if you feel strongly about one side or the other. But, if you are a trial lawyer, you really should be able to separate the two. The litigation graphics used on Day 6 were very good - both from a persuasion science standpoint and from an artistic standpoint. I appreciate the sophistication of them as they now can help me explain what good PowerPoint looks like (without getting into our presentations which are often sensitive or confidential). Let's discuss five key points and briefly discuss what you can learn from them. 1. These litigation graphics were more like a news graphic than a trial graphic. The national news industry is years ahead of most of the legal industry in creating memorable and persuasive graphics. I've written about this in articles like 10 Things Litigators Can Learn From Newscasters and Watch The Weather Channel Use Animation to Persuade.

I've written two articles recently about the impeachment proceedings, and after publishing each, someone has written to me and accused me of bias. With thousands of people reading these articles, this is to be expected, I suppose. Well, in these two bias accusations, I was accused once by the left and then next by the right. I'm proud of this fact, as this suggests I'm not actually demonstrating bias. In fact, I believe my political beliefs are not relevant in my role as CEO of A2L. We're not a political entity. So, I have to warn you, this article is not political, it is not about the content of the statements the presenters made, and it is also not really about the weight of the evidence on either side of the impeachment trial. It is, however, about who won the first day of trial presentations during the Senate impeachment trial — from a trial presentation best-practices standpoint. On this question, I thought the answer was clear.

Last month I wrote about trial technology lessons trial lawyers could learn from the impeachment hearings. In that article, I highlighted a (common) technology mistake one congressman made using PowerPoint as part of their effort to question a witness. As the impeachment hearings moved into the next phase in front of the Judiciary Committee,even more PowerPoint presentations were being used to help question witnesses. Unfortunately, since most of the members of congress are not routinely presenting and persuading with PowerPoint, they made many of the same litigation graphics mistakes that a novice trial lawyer might. PowerPoint is a funny thing. Anyone can use it (even trial lawyers, paralegals, and associates), but almost no one can use it well when persuasion is the goal. Since anyone can make a slide that looks pretty good, they often don't know they are damaging their persuasiveness in the process of creating a slide. In many trial presentations I see, lawyers who do their own work would have been far better off not using trial graphics at all. If you are an expert in the field (like the team at A2L), you know there are simply too many rules of psychology, technical challenges, and skill sets to keep track of it all -- unless you do this kind of work every day. We have written about this many times in articles like: 12 Reasons Litigation Graphics are More Complicated Than You Think 17 Reasons Why Litigation Consultants Are Better at Graphics Than Law Firms Trial Lawyers: Only Do What Only You Can Do In the judiciary phase of the impeachment hearings, I noticed the same kinds of mistakes were made over and over. Many relate to the most common type of litigation graphic -- the call-out. A call-out litigation graphic is one where a portion of a document is highlighted or magnified in someway to draw attention to some aspect of the document, often just some key phrases. We’ve written about best practices involving call-outs many times before: Should You Read Documents Out Loud at Trial? Font Matters - A Trial Graphics Consultant's Trick to Overcome Bias 3 Styles of Document Call-outs Used at Trial During a single day of hearings, I noticed at least five key problems that were repeated over and over. 1. Font size. The font size used throughout most of the hearings was generally not large enough. I try to encourage people not to let their font size dip below 28 points in PowerPoint. It’s a common rule that gets broken, but when you see your witnesses or jurors squinting, you know you’ve got an issue (as seen in the photo below). 2. Font Clarity. I think many call-outs are better when they are re-typed. Re-typing just makes the text more clear in most cases. I understand that many trial lawyers want a jury to feel that they are seeing the real document, but I believe this is best achieved by showing an image of the complete document and coupling that with a re-typed call-out in a font that matches the document. No one can read the tiny, fuzzy, and low-contrast text in the document call-out below when it is projected onto a screen. The designer would have been much better off showing the slide below, then highlighting, then doing a re-typed version of the text in a call-out that filled the screen.

I’ve been in the litigation graphics consulting business for 30 years. In that time, I’ve witnessed technology transitions from printed trial boards to laser disks to PowerPoint and much more. However, the most important transition I’ve seen involves a shift in belief. Top-tier trial lawyers who once viewed litigation graphics as optional now understand they are essential. Note that I say “understand” rather than “belief.” That’s because the need for high-quality and well-designed litigation graphics is rooted in science, not in a belief system. Study after study in the last 50 years authoritatively prove that litigation graphics are a requirement -- not a luxury -- for effective persuasion. Even after 30 years and thousands of cases, I genuinely love trying to figure out how to make a complex or boring case interesting and understandable while using the latest in persuasion science to convince the factfinder(s) that our position is correct. I’m passionate about this work, and I enjoy writing about it. Below are the fifteen articles that I think are a must-read for every trial lawyer (and the trial team members who support them) who is serious about persuading judges and juries. I’ve added a few bonus webinars and books after the list. Read these and the articles linked to from these articles, and you’ll be a near-expert in litigation graphics theory and visual persuasion. 12 Reasons Litigation Graphics are More Complicated Than You Think 16 PowerPoint Litigation Graphics You Won't Believe Are PowerPoint 12 Ways to SUCCESSFULLY Combine Oral and Visual Presentations

I speak and write often about the kind of mistakes that lawyers often make at trial in presenting graphics. Some of these critical errors include reading your PowerPoint slides, presenting overly dense and complex information, coupling low-contrast demonstratives with a low-quality projector, and even using fonts that are too small. All of these mistakes can radically reduce your persuasiveness. A2L articles like, The 12 Worst PowerPoint Mistakes Litigators Make, The 14 Most Preventable Trial Preparation Mistakes, and 24 Mistakes That Make For a DeMONSTERative Evidence Nightmare are valuable for any trial lawyer and will help you overcome many a pitfall. Most of our litigation graphics clients who hire A2L to help develop their opening, closing, and expert presentations, say during the creative process that “I'll know it when I see it.” Indeed, just as choosing from a number of demonstrative options is a helpful time and energy saver for most trial attorneys, there’s also no substitute for seeing a mistake to appreciate why it is bad. That's the spirit of this article. I recently found a small corner of the Internet that highlights terrible infographics, and there are many useful lessons here for trial lawyers. Let's review a few and hope they don't remind you of anything done by your team or litigation graphics provider. Use the Right Type of Chart Great design is not form over function. Instead, it is function first with beautiful form (see, Litigation Graphics: It's Not a Beauty Contest). While this chart above is interesting to look at, it's annoying from the perspective of quickly conveying information. As I wrote in a recent post, litigation graphics should be very clear AND very quickly understood. See, One Demonstrative Exhibit, One Concept. I think litigation graphics should generally be able to stand on their own without explanation and be understood in less than 30 seconds. This chart would be much clearer if presented as a column chart with the dates running chronologically from left to right along the bottom. One could emphasize the differences in ages by having the left side of the chart run from 50 - 75 instead of something like 0-100. We've discussed this chart “cheat” before in 5 Demonstrative Evidence Tricks and Cheats to Watch Out For.

At A2L, we publish so many articles about litigation and trial preparation that I like to share the best of the best periodically.

I was in New Orleans recently to speak at the DRI Toxic Torts and Environmental Law Seminar, and while I was in the city, I took some time to visit the National WW II Museum in the downtown area. At the museum, I was struck by a graphic exhibit that showed that in 1941, the United States had only 336,000 soldiers in uniform, compared with 850,000 for Japan and 3.1 million for Nazi Germany. There is a quick and easy lesson here for trial lawyers.