Juryology
@juryology.bsky.social
Jury expert guy, working nationwide in the art & science of juror persuasion & understanding. Legal education about juries suuuuucks; we were taught crap. I'm the Jury Mythbuster. ⚖️
See Juryology.com. You know. If you want to.
See Juryology.com. You know. If you want to.
Yes, I am aware. Salutes to them.
March 23, 2025 at 1:08 AM
Yes, I am aware. Salutes to them.
I'm just glad for confirmation that my technique of routing these people to you is working.
January 15, 2025 at 10:48 PM
I'm just glad for confirmation that my technique of routing these people to you is working.
Also common because lawyers have not been *taught* the right tools. Law school teaches a lot of wrong stuff about jury trial practice, & entirely omits most right stuff. So, we come out of law school & absorb what we see from older lawyers... thus perpetuating cycles of intergenerational ignorance.
December 14, 2024 at 10:09 PM
Also common because lawyers have not been *taught* the right tools. Law school teaches a lot of wrong stuff about jury trial practice, & entirely omits most right stuff. So, we come out of law school & absorb what we see from older lawyers... thus perpetuating cycles of intergenerational ignorance.
Yeah, I totally believe that. Lawyers are far less likely to "round off" the standard of proof, either upward in civil cases or downward in crim cases, than civilians. (Different pre-sets & slightly different agendas, obvy.)
Brava to her for serving. Those are hard cases for jurors.
Brava to her for serving. Those are hard cases for jurors.
December 14, 2024 at 7:48 PM
Yeah, I totally believe that. Lawyers are far less likely to "round off" the standard of proof, either upward in civil cases or downward in crim cases, than civilians. (Different pre-sets & slightly different agendas, obvy.)
Brava to her for serving. Those are hard cases for jurors.
Brava to her for serving. Those are hard cases for jurors.
You're welcome. Be sure to read the 2d post, too, for a format that does work. Thanks! ⚖️
December 14, 2024 at 7:41 PM
You're welcome. Be sure to read the 2d post, too, for a format that does work. Thanks! ⚖️
Everyone passes the test on the *conscious* part of s/proof.
BUT, too answer your question, the best discussions in voir dire come from well-crafted Q's in this form:
Some people think ____; others think __ [opposite]__. Which side are you closer to? [Pause. If no volunteers, then] Juror 8?"
BUT, too answer your question, the best discussions in voir dire come from well-crafted Q's in this form:
Some people think ____; others think __ [opposite]__. Which side are you closer to? [Pause. If no volunteers, then] Juror 8?"
December 14, 2024 at 7:39 PM
Everyone passes the test on the *conscious* part of s/proof.
BUT, too answer your question, the best discussions in voir dire come from well-crafted Q's in this form:
Some people think ____; others think __ [opposite]__. Which side are you closer to? [Pause. If no volunteers, then] Juror 8?"
BUT, too answer your question, the best discussions in voir dire come from well-crafted Q's in this form:
Some people think ____; others think __ [opposite]__. Which side are you closer to? [Pause. If no volunteers, then] Juror 8?"
Well, for the most part, I would avoid burden or standard of proof in voir dire. It isn't very productive. Most Americans reverse the standards of proof IN THEIR GUTS; we convict crim defs if he "probably" did it, while demanding high levels of proof to give $ to civil pltf... but that's UNCONSCIOUS
December 14, 2024 at 7:35 PM
Well, for the most part, I would avoid burden or standard of proof in voir dire. It isn't very productive. Most Americans reverse the standards of proof IN THEIR GUTS; we convict crim defs if he "probably" did it, while demanding high levels of proof to give $ to civil pltf... but that's UNCONSCIOUS
You've JUST posted and thus I'm the only Like at this second, but I am nevertheless calling this an underrated post. Brava.
December 14, 2024 at 7:15 PM
You've JUST posted and thus I'm the only Like at this second, but I am nevertheless calling this an underrated post. Brava.
Thank you, Sir. ⚖️ I appreciate it.
December 14, 2024 at 7:07 PM
Thank you, Sir. ⚖️ I appreciate it.
voir dire time to LEARN. Job 1-10 of voir dire is GET INFO THAT SORTS PEOPLE INTO SIDE-PREFERENCE. Lawyers aren't awesome at that, and this method (or really, the mentality behind it) is part of that stumbling block.
December 14, 2024 at 7:03 PM
voir dire time to LEARN. Job 1-10 of voir dire is GET INFO THAT SORTS PEOPLE INTO SIDE-PREFERENCE. Lawyers aren't awesome at that, and this method (or really, the mentality behind it) is part of that stumbling block.
did it shut EVERYONE down on a topic that could have been a fruitful discussion for both cause & peremp challenges? Yep.
That "Give rule, then ask" format is really just attys doing what they love: *telling* civilians stuff in the mistaken belief that that achieves persuasion. Wrong. Instead, use
That "Give rule, then ask" format is really just attys doing what they love: *telling* civilians stuff in the mistaken belief that that achieves persuasion. Wrong. Instead, use
December 14, 2024 at 7:01 PM
did it shut EVERYONE down on a topic that could have been a fruitful discussion for both cause & peremp challenges? Yep.
That "Give rule, then ask" format is really just attys doing what they love: *telling* civilians stuff in the mistaken belief that that achieves persuasion. Wrong. Instead, use
That "Give rule, then ask" format is really just attys doing what they love: *telling* civilians stuff in the mistaken belief that that achieves persuasion. Wrong. Instead, use
(Put aside the horrid habit of attys saying "problem" during v.d. Ugh.) Citizen says, "Yeah,I'd wonder what he's hiding." Atty pounces: "But you understand the 5th Amendment says blah blah... Would you follow this crucial Const command???" "Well, sure."
Was anyone's mind actually changed? Nope. But
Was anyone's mind actually changed? Nope. But
December 14, 2024 at 6:58 PM
(Put aside the horrid habit of attys saying "problem" during v.d. Ugh.) Citizen says, "Yeah,I'd wonder what he's hiding." Atty pounces: "But you understand the 5th Amendment says blah blah... Would you follow this crucial Const command???" "Well, sure."
Was anyone's mind actually changed? Nope. But
Was anyone's mind actually changed? Nope. But
That said, my point wasn't that asking about b/proof or s/proof is against the rules; it's fair. But "Give rule then ask civilians if they'll follow it" (on any subject) is obtuse, ham-handed, & ineffective.
E.g.: Crim def atty says, "My client might not testify. Would anyone have problem w/that?"
E.g.: Crim def atty says, "My client might not testify. Would anyone have problem w/that?"
December 14, 2024 at 6:54 PM
That said, my point wasn't that asking about b/proof or s/proof is against the rules; it's fair. But "Give rule then ask civilians if they'll follow it" (on any subject) is obtuse, ham-handed, & ineffective.
E.g.: Crim def atty says, "My client might not testify. Would anyone have problem w/that?"
E.g.: Crim def atty says, "My client might not testify. Would anyone have problem w/that?"
Exactly; it does not achieve that. Even IF that were a worthy goal (it's not), and even IF it were worth the opportunity cost of making better use of voir dire time (it's not), it's too clever by half. Attys think they're clever with that kind of thing... and it doesn't work.
December 14, 2024 at 6:49 PM
Exactly; it does not achieve that. Even IF that were a worthy goal (it's not), and even IF it were worth the opportunity cost of making better use of voir dire time (it's not), it's too clever by half. Attys think they're clever with that kind of thing... and it doesn't work.
Very sorry, Nadine. I hope your nerve gets free.
November 29, 2024 at 7:42 AM
Very sorry, Nadine. I hope your nerve gets free.
No data supports "length of jury deliberation" correlates to a verdict for any particular side, neither in criminal nor civil cases. It's just another thing that became lawyer folklore without anyone actually examining it.
See my career for several thousand other examples! ⚖️
See my career for several thousand other examples! ⚖️
November 26, 2024 at 8:39 PM
No data supports "length of jury deliberation" correlates to a verdict for any particular side, neither in criminal nor civil cases. It's just another thing that became lawyer folklore without anyone actually examining it.
See my career for several thousand other examples! ⚖️
See my career for several thousand other examples! ⚖️
If the content is competing with clothing of the speaker, or even could, then that's a whooooole other discussion we should have about themes, Story, sequence, metaphor, juror tutorials on standards, and so on.
November 25, 2024 at 4:06 PM
If the content is competing with clothing of the speaker, or even could, then that's a whooooole other discussion we should have about themes, Story, sequence, metaphor, juror tutorials on standards, and so on.
Nah, that's my point: THAT is the unfounded but oft-repeated folklore re clothing. Give jurors - and yourself - more credit than that; they aren't distracted by a tie. In several thousand mock & real jurors, 0 have "remembered" a tie if his presentation was any good. Going for relatable, not distant
November 25, 2024 at 4:02 PM
Nah, that's my point: THAT is the unfounded but oft-repeated folklore re clothing. Give jurors - and yourself - more credit than that; they aren't distracted by a tie. In several thousand mock & real jurors, 0 have "remembered" a tie if his presentation was any good. Going for relatable, not distant
Yes. Anything other than funeral director; anything other than "the uniform" of dark suit, white shirt, red tie. You should try to be relatable and approachable. Wear what YOU like. I go light grey with different color stripes or glen plaid, or medium or royal blue, or dark green.
November 25, 2024 at 3:50 PM
Yes. Anything other than funeral director; anything other than "the uniform" of dark suit, white shirt, red tie. You should try to be relatable and approachable. Wear what YOU like. I go light grey with different color stripes or glen plaid, or medium or royal blue, or dark green.