In today's fast-paced world, capturing and maintaining the attention of a millennial jury can be a daunting task for trial lawyers. With their constant exposure to various forms of media and information overload, keeping millennials engaged requires a strategic approach. In this blog post, we will delve deeper into each tip to help trial lawyers effectively engage millennial jurors and present their case persuasively.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect is a fascinating cognitive bias that can have significant implications for the justice system, particularly when it comes to juries. This effect refers to the tendency of individuals to overestimate their own abilities and knowledge in a particular area, leading them to believe that they are more competent than they actually are.
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.
by Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting Nearly 200,000 visits were made to A2L Consulting's Litigation Consulting Report Blog in 2015. With every page view, our readers express their opinion of the value of each article. Those that are the most valuable get the most page views. Today, I'm happy to share the very best articles of 2015 as chosen by our readers' reading habits. This year, we posted 90 new articles, and that brings our total blog library to nearly 500 articles. If you are involved in litigation or have to persuade a skeptical audience of anything, these articles are an incredibly valuable resource that are available at absolutely no charge. As we approach our five-year anniversary of this blog, I am very proud of our accomplishments. I'm excited to report that we now have 7,800 subscribers, some articles have been viewed more than 30,000 times, and the ABA named ours one of the top blogs in the legal industry. Not bad for our first five years. In 2015, these 15 articles below stood out as the very top articles of 2015. Articles focused on PowerPoint, litigation graphics, persuasion, and voir dire continue to dominate our readers' interest. Each of these articles can be easily tweeted or shared on Linkedin using the buttons below the article title. All are free to enjoy. I wish you the very best 2016, and here is a link to claim a free subscription so that you get notified when these articles are published. 15. How to Make PowerPoint Trial Timelines Feel More Like a Long Document 14. A Surprising New Reason to Repeat Yourself at Trial 13. Lawyer Delivers Excellent PowerPoint Presentation 12. With So Few Trials, Where Do You Find Trial Experience Now? 11. 5 Ways to Maximize Persuasion During Opening Statements - Part 1 10. How to Apply Cialdini's 6 Principles of Persuasion in the Courtroom 9. 9 Things In-House Counsel Say About Outside Litigation Counsel 8. Repelling the Reptile Trial Strategy - Pt 4 - 7 Reasons the Tactic Still Works 7. 10 Ways to Lose Voir Dire 6. Repelling the Reptile Strategy - Part 3 - Understanding the Bad Science 5. How Much Text on a PowerPoint Slide is Too Much? 4. Repelling the Reptile Trial Strategy - Part 5 - 12 Ways to Kill the Reptile 3. Repelling the Reptile Trial Strategy - Pt 2 - 10 Ways to Spot the Reptile 2. Repelling the Reptile Trial Strategy as Defense Counsel - Part 1 1. Why the Color of a Dress Matters to Litigators and Litigation Graphics
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 Lorraine Kestle Graphic Designer A2L Consulting The age-old adage that there are two sides (at least) to every story is clearly evident in litigation. Both parties believe that the applicable law, when applied to the facts, supports their position, or they likely would not be going to court. The parties and the lawyers are familiar with the facts and the law. Everyone fully understands the nuances of their position. Everyone, that is, but the judge and jury who are hearing the case for the first time. It is these “novices to the case” who will ultimately decide which version of the facts or story is most persuasive. For one day, I was a “novice to the case” in the courtroom as I helped our trial technician set up for a PowerPoint presentation in court. I observed both sides’ opening statements as well as the direct and cross-examinations. Although I have been in the courtroom on numerous occasions, I had no prior knowledge of the substance of this matter and did not work on this presentation. Our client, the plaintiff in this case, delivered an opening statement that was enhanced with a PowerPoint presentation, while opposing counsel relied on typed or handwritten notes and an easel with a large paper tablet. After observing both approaches, I came away with what I think are interesting conclusions about the effect that the PowerPoint presentation had on my understanding of the case, the attorney’s arguments, and my initial impression of liability. 1. An Increased Perception Of Preparation, Competence And Persuasion As a former paralegal, I know that preparation is one of the keys to success in litigation. And while I believe both sides were equally prepared, this was not the impression created in the courtroom by defendant’s counsel. What set the opening statements apart was the PowerPoint presentation used by our client. It served as a baseline of comparison for what followed.
As someone who has participated in countless mock trials, I can attest to the fact that it can be an incredibly stressful and overwhelming experience. From preparing your arguments to presenting them in front of a panel of jurors or judges, there are a lot of moving parts to keep track of.
by Ryan H. Flax (Former) Managing Director, Litigation Consulting & General Counsel A2L Consulting It’s always interesting to me how humans view and judge each other. We all do it almost all of the time, in every interaction with other people. We even do it when we don’t even interact with others, for example, while driving or watching TV. We develop little dramas and characters in our minds to make sense of the world around us and its characters. This is particularly important in my profession, where my goal is to help litigators frame their case or showcase their client in a compelling and engaging way for judge or jury. I’ve just watched the video below and it highlights how important it is to frame our clients’ character correctly when we want a decision maker to see things our way. That “correct” way of introducing our client is whatever way will result in a decision in our favor – Ask: what would make the judge or jury feel our client should prevail?
by Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting In my last post, 7 Bad Habits of Law Firm Litigators, I wrote about the problems caused by litigators who, even when they have an adequate budget, design their own PowerPoint slides for trial. I've seen this result in: demonstrative evidence being excluded for using inappropriate tactics; demonstrative evidence being used for outright misconduct; opportunities being missed to use persuasion tricks of the trade; lawyers getting stuck in a chronological recitation of the facts; an overall lack of anything memorable or creative being presented; the use of out-of-date techniques like bullet points that damage credibility; and many other things that, as I said a few Halloween's ago, can lead to a deMONSTERative evidence nightmare. Well, there's new problem to add to this list of challenges faced by litigators who design their own slides, and it was just revealed by a brand new study conducted by the Missouri School of Journalism and the Washington Post.
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.
by Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting I want to share the results of an interesting study that I recently read. I believe that it has implications for how we present information in the courtroom. It appears in the October 2015 Journal of Experimental Psychology, and is entitled Knowledge Does Not Protect Against Illusory Truth. As experts in the persuasion business, we have long known about the power of repetition. We use it as a specific rhetorical technique during opening statements. We incorporate repetition when creating demonstrative evidence. We even choose to repeat the same message in many different formats (trial boards, PowerPoint, scale models) to reach different types of learners. We do this because repetition helps people remember things, it signals that something is important, and it helps presenters be more persuasive. Studies have long shown that the more we hear something, the more likely we are to believe it. This is why some people believe that Vitamin C helps stave off a cold or that you should drink eight glasses of water per day to maintain good health. Both of these statements lack any scientific basis. We've just heard them so often that many have come to believe them. Think about the assertions we are already hearing over and over in this election season. Hillary Clinton hid something in her email. Donald Trump declared bankruptcy four times. Carly Fiorina was a bad CEO. Planned Parenthood sells aborted baby parts. I don't know how much truth there is in any of these statements, but I do know that the more I hear them, the more I tend to believe them. That’s the power of repetition. Psychologists call this the illusory truth effect, and it's why we counsel our clients to use repetition throughout a case. When people don't know anything about a particular topic, the illusory truth effect tells us that the more they hear an assertion, the more they will believe it.
by Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting Well, no one ever said a trial was like a day at the beach. Except that there are a lot of similarities, if you look hard enough. I'm just back from an annual two-week family vacation at the Outer Banks of North Carolina. My wife and I have seven-year-old triplet girls. My friend says that doesn’t sound too much like a vacation, and his point is well taken in many ways. Although anyone who has done this type of trip with young kids will have some memories that seem as if they came from a Norman Rockwell painting, there are plenty of stressful or crazy moments. Fortunately, with time, the human brain can focus on the good memories. This type of vacation time is chaotic, stressful, and, yes, fulfilling. And that reminds me an awful lot of what I do every day — high-stakes litigation. Let’s consider how these two events are similar. 1) Other stuff comes up. I worked one 16-hour day at the beach. I had to. Two other managers were traveling, and one was slammed. I had to pitch in even if it was from 350 miles away. A long trial is no different. Often, you have to focus on other clients for a bit and you must plan for that possibility at trial. 2) Breakdowns happen. My clunky old Range Rover broke down at the beach. My wife was not pleased, but I’m always prepared for such an event. I have towing coverage that brought the car home, and I enjoyed driving on the beach in a four-door Jeep Wrangler instead. Things break down at trial too, often at the least opportune times. If you're not mentally prepared for that, if you haven’t planned for it, you're going to look bad at trial. See, 12 Ways to Avoid a Trial Technology Superbowl-style Courtroom Blackout. 3) Surprise is the key. My daughters are well behaved, but they need to see the unexpected from time to time, whether it’s an unusual shell on the beach or a funny kind of ketchup bottle. If they don’t have that, they become moody and distracted. Judges and jurors react similarly at trial. If you don't surprise them, they become bored and antsy. Learn the power of surprise. See, Could Surprise Be One of Your Best Visual Persuasion Tools?
Share: