By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on yet another momentous legal issue – this time, the claim of absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for claimed official acts by former President, Donald Trump who faces, among other charges, four criminal counts involving conspiracy to defraud the government, disenfranchise voters, […]
Ground Your Hypotheticals Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: As the historic first (but not last) criminal trial of a former U.S. President was kicking off last week, Mr. Trump commented, “Jury selection is largely luck,” before moving on to his more familiar complaints about the unfairness of the venue, the charges, the judge, and the trial process as a
Don’t Rely on Luck in Picking Your Jury Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: The Reptile approach to courtroom persuasion aims to sell plaintiffs’ cases by invoking absolute duties for protection wrapped around a fear appeal that resonates with the jurors. Even with the Reptile’s ‘reboot’ version, the ‘Edge’ training appears to continue this emphasis. In a second part of an article in the CLM
As the Reptile Evolves, Update Your Understanding of ‘Duty’ Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Your typical mock trial might involve three juries, with a total of 30 or so mock jurors. The typical public opinion poll run by an organization like Gallup, however, can involve more like 1000 participants. So what is the disconnect when it comes to sample size, the variable that researchers refer
Know the Right N: How Participant Numbers Influence the Value of Your Mock Trial Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Recently, civil defendants have been interested in a new label: “Safetyism.” The idea focuses on a pervasive and increasing attitude in the jury-eligible population that demands unrealistic standards when it comes to protecting customers, patients, and the general public. The name, I think, might be a little deceptive, because it isn’t
(Safely) Combat Safety Absolutism Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: In an era of increased juror skepticism and perceived “Nuclear Verdicts,” there has been a call for new thinking on defense side. The need is for fresh approaches to cut against the factors motivating jurors toward extreme verdicts. The approach outlined in the book Nuclear Verdicts by Tyson & Mendes partner
Defense Opening: Repair Credibility First Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: The “Reptile” approach to trying civil cases by targeting a fear response has transitioned from being a novelty to being a mainstay in a little more than a decade. While the approach has not always been taken seriously by defendants, it has been the North Star for many on the plaintiff’s
Be Ready for a Reptile-Reboot Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: In our increasingly digital world, the idea of taking notes the old-fashioned way with paper and pen can feel quaint. Yet, many of us still do it. For those jurors who are permitted to take notes, they are almost certainly doing it the old-fashioned way. New research, however, continues to demonstrate
Encourage Juror Note-Taking (and Take Notes Yourselves) Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: The distinction between what is fact and what is opinion is arguably one of the most fundamental distinctions in law. But in practice, it is actually a lawyer’s distinction. In the real world, and in the minds of many jurors and some judges, facts and opinions end up being combined and mixed. The
Expect Jurors to Mix Fact and Opinion Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: In just over a month, barring any unforeseen delays, New York prosecutors and attorneys for criminal defendant Donald J. Trump will be picking a jury in what’s become known as the “hush money” case. The March 25th trial focuses on the payments the defendant made to former porn star Stormy Daniels
Improve Voir Dire: A Trump-Jury Example Script Read More »