The Litigation Consulting Report

Imagine this: an elderly woman, Mrs. Wilson, arrives at Meadowvale Grocery for her weekly shopping. She parks her car, steps gingerly toward the cart rack — but the carts there are all old, locked together, and none are available. Instead, in a hurry to grab some fresh produce before the store closes, she sees a lone cart pushed to the side with a bright tag: “BROKEN – DO NOT USE.” Distracted, a bit anxious about walking too far on her sore knees, she grabs that broken cart anyway. As she pushes it toward the entrance, the front wheel locks, the cart stops short, and her body doesn’t. She stumbles forward. Her foot catches on a broken patch of asphalt the store’s maintenance team meant to fix months ago. Before she can catch herself — she falls hard on the concrete. The result: a broken hip, pain she’ll carry for life, therapy, hospital bills, and a grocery-store insurer eager to argue that she was negligent for using a “clearly marked” broken cart. That’s the core narrative. How should you present it in your opening statement? Do you walk the jury through the timeline step by step — 5:07 p.m. arrival, 5:10 p.m. fall, 5:13 p.m. EMS — or do you tell a story that lets jurors feel Mrs. Wilson’s frailty, her rush, her split-second decision, and the store’s choices that put her on the ground? As consultants to litigators, we at Persuadius believe — strongly — that persuasive storytelling in trial almost always requires more than a bare chronology. And importantly, these techniques are not just “plaintiff tricks.” The very same narrative tools are extraordinarily effective for defense teams and complex commercial litigators too.

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 high-stakes litigation, a great trial graphic doesn’t merely “support” the narrative — it is the narrative. It is the difference between jurors leaning in or tuning out, between a judge following your logic or silently asking themselves, What is counsel even trying to say? After more than thirty years of building litigation graphics for some of the most sophisticated trial teams in the country, I’ve noticed a pattern: the teams who win consistently follow the same three core rules, whether consciously or not. Conversely, the teams who struggle with persuading lay decision-makers tend to violate these rules — sometimes subtly, sometimes flagrantly. These rules are not aesthetic preferences. They are grounded in cognitive psychology, attention span research, and the simple reality that most jurors don’t think the way lawyers do. Here are the three rules: Every litigation graphic should be understandable without explanation, and each should convey only one short sentence of meaning. Never — not once — read the long-form text on a litigation graphic.

Science tells us that when persuading with words, pictures can make us many times more persuasive. Half of our business is rooted in this basic truth. But I believe there’s a way to go further and be even more persuasive. It’s something I call Persuasion Pairing. What Is Persuasion Pairing? By Persuasion Pairing, I mean carefully and cleverly combining a short phrase or word with a reinforcing picture or other sensory element. It’s more than just a visual metaphor. Done well, it’s like a supercharged persuasive tool—a verbal hook plus a visual anchor that makes a message unforgettable. Consider a scene from Molly’s Game, a true story of a competitive skier turned celebrity poker game matriarch, masterfully acted by Jessica Chastain. At one point, the skiing course is described as being “like skiing down the side of one of the great pyramids.” That line instantly paints a picture: steep, intimidating, and unforgettable. Years later, I’ve never forgotten it. That’s Persuasion Pairing in action. Here's the 10-second clip from the movie below.

On the night of Friday, July 4, the Guadalupe River in Texas rose more than 26 feet in just 45 minutes, triggering catastrophic flash floods throughout the Hill Country. Communities near Kerrville were overwhelmed. Camp Mystic, a beloved girls’ camp, was among the hardest hit. As of this writing, more than 100 lives have been lost, and over 160 people remain missing.

I've written extensively about what you should do when using storytelling techniques in the courtroom to persuade. I've even released a free book and free webinar on the topic. But I don't think I've ever really talked about the mistakes one can make—most of which I've seen (from opponents). Legal storytelling is both an art and a technique that can be incredibly effective. However, it's easy to make mistakes that can undermine your narrative. This blog will walk you through twelve common legal storytelling pitfalls and how to avoid them. 1. Neglecting a Clear Structure A strong structure is the backbone of compelling legal storytelling. Without it, your legal narrative can become confusing and aimless. Ensure your story has a clear beginning, middle, and end that hopefully includes a good guy, overcoming some huge hurdle, and a clear bad guy. A well-structured narrative guides your audience through the complexities of the case, breaking it down into digestible parts. This segmentation also aids in highlighting key points and building a logical argument. It's the difference between a tangled maze of information and a clear, scenic route that leads to persuasion. Structure not only makes your story consumable but also reinforces its persuasive power. 2. Overloading with Jargon Legal jargon can detach your audience from your story. Simplifying complex terms is essential for maintaining clarity and accessibility for your audience. While using technical language to demonstrate expertise is tempting, it often alienates the very people you're attempting to persuade. Legal storytelling is about connection, and that connection is built on understanding. When judges and jurors can easily comprehend the narrative, they are more inclined to trust the storyteller and the message being delivered. 3. Forgetting the Audience Understanding your audience is vital. Tailor your language, examples, and tone to resonate with those you're addressing, ensuring your story holds their attention. Knowing your audience includes recognizing their values, beliefs, and what piques their interest. It transforms your legal storytelling from a one-size-fits-all approach to a personalized engagement, making your argument more compelling.

Introduction: The Illusion of Rational Minds Ask most people—especially smart professionals—how they form opinions, and you’ll get some version of the same story: "I look at the facts. I weigh the evidence. I follow the logic." But here’s the problem: neuroscience, psychology, and real-world experience say otherwise.

At Persuadius, we specialize in transforming complexity into clarity—especially using litigation graphics. Whether it’s a demonstrative exhibit that makes a technical expert accessible or a timeline that crystallizes causation, the right visual can make all the difference.

Bullet points undermine persuasion. Scientific evidence supports this, and my colleagues and I have consistently emphasized this over the past 15 years in this blog through articles such as: 12 Reasons Bullet Points Are Bad (in Trial Graphics or Anywhere) The 12 Worst PowerPoint Mistakes Litigators Make Don't Use PowerPoint as a Crutch in Trial or Anywhere Why Reading Your Litigation PowerPoint Slides Hurts Jurors 5 Ways to Maximize Persuasion During Opening Statements - Part 4 12 Ways to SUCCESSFULLY Combine Oral and Visual Presentations Powerful PowerPoint Presentation Tips: Ditch the Bullet Points! Still Think Persuasion is About Talking While Showing Bullet Points? How Many Persuasion Errors Can You Spot in This Slide? 11 Lessons Trial Lawyers Can Learn From Jay Z's Lawyer Video Presentation But wait, Ken, you just used bullet points in the opening paragraph of this article!!! Yes, I did. Quite purposefully. I want you to imagine reading that same list while I'm reading it to you almost simultaneously, but not perfectly synched with your reading. Are you imagining trying to read faster than I was speaking? That's common—judges and jurors (or any audience) often try to outpace the speaker. You might have felt tempted to ignore what I'm saying and just focus on reading. Or, you might think, "I'm smart and can multitask by listening and reading simultaneously." Maybe so, but wouldn't it be better to choose either to read or to listen? This isn't about competing; it's about persuading effectively. The issue here concerns trial lawyers who utilize bullet points on PowerPoint slides. You're familiar with the scenario. They glance at their slide as you read it, and then they read the bullet point aloud to you. This isn't a one-time occurrence. They might repeat this process hundreds of times throughout a single trial.

On Monday, Jay-Z's lawyer, Alex Spiro, held a press conference to address allegations against the rapper to publicly dispute rape claims and clarify the situation. Although the statement's purpose was evident—protecting his client and trying to influence public perception—several visual presentation errors can offer essential insights for legal communications in and out of the courtroom. I am not personally acquainted with Mr. Shapiro, but his firm, Quinn Emanuel et al., has been a client. Overall, I believe he performed exceptionally well and commend his assertive defense. It essentially acknowledges that Jay-Z faces a more significant threat to his reputation than legal liability in this case. While Mr. Spiro's oral presentation is nearly flawless, his litigation graphics presentation is substandard . . . profoundly substandard. For a firm like Quinn to have used this is surprising. Having defended celebrities wrongly accused of sexual assault, I know there is a rush to get out the truth and to do so forcefully. Perhaps in that rush, commonsense modern rules of litigation graphics were brushed aside. We can learn from this. Below, I offer 11 lessons for your next trial/litigation graphics presentation, whether for trial or reputation defense.