Archives – Page 46 – The Red Well

Ghost Notes

September 17th, 2020|

I’ve been thinking recently about how one ever demonstrates that nothing happened because something did happen. Specifically, with regard to the protests over police shootings, police abuse, etc., how does one demonstrate that new policies make a difference? The difference is noticed only when nothing happens. Undoubtedly, most police officer shootings happen because the officer had no choice other than to prevent being killed himself/herself, or to prevent someone else from being killed/injured. In other words, they are “good” shoots. But, with regard to the “bad” police shootings/arrests/killings, the only way to know if, for example, new policies on

Dealing with Juror Fatigue in Zoom Trials

September 15th, 2020|

“Six months into the pandemic, trial-by-video-jury – at least in the civil context – is beginning to morph from experiment to expectation. And while lawyers aren’t totally sold on the concept, a growing chorus of judges is making it clear that it may be the only way to keep their dockets moving” (Law.com). Clearly, with the Coronavirus continuing to ravage the country, the need to explore and utilize other options for civil trials is necessary. And, while there have been several “successful” Zoom trials, there have also been dozens of legitimate concerns and questions raised about everything from how to

The Role of Defensive Attribution in Jury Verdicts in Traumatic Injury Cases

September 10th, 2020|

One of the first memorable studies that I read about jury psychology in graduate school was the 1997 study by Neil Feigenson and colleagues on the relationship between injury severity and blameworthiness. This was early in my graduate studies when I was focused on the effects of injury severity, particularly on attributions of fault. My operating theory at the time, which was also a commonly held belief in the field, was that jurors were more likely to blame the defendant as the severity of the injury to the plaintiff increased, regardless of the strength of the liability evidence against that

“Let Patients Choose”: Jurors’ COVID-Era Opinions of the Pharmaceutical Industry – Part 2

September 3rd, 2020|

Medical care should be between a doctor and a patient. Pharmaceutical companies should not have a say in what medications we are allowed to take or what medications are available to us. It should be our choice. They are taking away the choice from patients and doctors. – a recent mock juror We hear it over and over in our mock trials: Having a choice. The ability to make an informed decision. Individuals experiencing an illness or injury enter a world that can feel out of their control. If there is no one directly responsible for their pain, they may transfer

3 Key Strategy Insights from a Debate Coach

September 2nd, 2020|

By Scott Herndon, M.A. When I joined Sound Jury Consulting 5 years ago, I entered with a unique background – I am a college debate coach. College debate is a high-speed, research-oriented, game of words that operates a little like verbal chess. Teams present and apply arguments about complex public policy questions to persuade a judge they have the best idea, and thus win the debate. As I settled into my role with Sound Jury Consulting, I realized the skills I’d honed as a debate coach for two decades were immediately applicable to my work as a trial consultant. While

Rethinking Your Takeaways from Mock Trials and Focus Groups

August 27th, 2020|

By Jill D. Schmid, Ph.D. With every project, I’m reminded of the power of a mock trial to effectively and efficiently inform one’s litigation strategy. Too often I think attorneys and their clients view a mock trial from an “outcome” perspective only, or primarily – a “Will I win or lose?” and “If I lose how much will it cost my client?” standpoint. This is far too simplistic a way to view a mock trial and, most importantly, the goal of the mock trial is not to “win.” One “wins” by finding out how you lose and then doing what

Savior or Scoundrel? Jurors’ COVID-Era Opinions of the Pharmaceutical Industry – Part 1

August 27th, 2020|

In recent years, “Big Pharma” has become a boogeyman of sorts in both online and public discourse. From the anti-vaccination movement to the persistent rumors that the medical and/or pharmaceutical industry have developed a cure for cancer and are withholding it from the general public,1 conspiracy theories around the pharmaceutical industry reach into many aspects of our lives. Whether minor or extreme, such attitudes have carried over into how jurors view pharma-related litigation. Of course, public distrust has been aggravated by a series of high-profile bad actors and investigations into the practices of various pharmaceutical companies. For example, in September

Strategically Approaching New COVID-19 Jury Selection Procedures

August 20th, 2020|

The priority of social distancing in the age of COVID-19 has led to innovations in trial practices, including substantial changes to how jury selection is conducted. Jury selection is one of the most people and space-intensive elements of a trial. Typically, a large pool of potential jurors is brought in, stacked next to each other in a closed space, sharing a microphone, and/or vocally projecting their answers to voir dire questions. In response to the risk such conventional practices pose, courts have sought to use larger venues – armories, gyms, or convention centers – in order to allow socially-distanced

How Hollywood Can Inspire Your Courtroom Presentations

August 20th, 2020|

Name the last movie you watched. Can you remember how many times there were edits? How many transitions? What kind? Most of us have watched movies our entire lives without really attending to their cuts and transitions – but our brains still do. It’s why a great editor can be as important to a film’s effectiveness as its director or star actor (even if they’re significantly less celebrated). In fact, the story goes that the original Star Wars was “saved,” or at least significantly aided, by those who edited it. Whether we’re actively thinking about them or not, transitions offer

Nuclear Verdicts: Part 2

August 20th, 2020|

Face it, some trials are bad, there is liability, there are real damages. Evaluating those honestly and without bias is what we, as trial consultants, help our clients accomplish. And, that said, the other issue in mock jury research when we work for the defense is that the plaintiff’s argument, when presented during the mock jury exercise, is roleplayed by someone on the trial team and often falls flat. It is critical in mock jury research that “the other side’s” arguments are as strong as, or stronger than, what the actual opponent will say and do. Over the years, this