By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: When you are working on boiling down your message, there will often be that indefinable “something” that makes you recognize when you have the right language. A good trial theme, for example, doesn’t just summarize the strength of your case. As I’ve waxed before, the right theme will be based in language […]
Appreciate the Nuance of a Theme Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Juror 1: “The next category is ‘pain and suffering.’ How are we supposed to get to get that number?” Juror 2: “It is just whatever we want…there’s no guidance for it.“ Juror 1: “How are we supposed to do that? Put a dollar value on pain and suffering?“ Seeing an
Understand Jurors’ Process on Pain and Suffering Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Congress and the American public have been gripped by some unknowns recently. A whistleblower in the intelligence community made a claim that the Inspector General considered both credible and urgent. But, initially at least, that’s about all we knew because the whistleblower’s complaint was not provided, as the law requires,
Address the Central Unknown Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: The government often plays a background role in civil litigation. An action, decision, or product from one party might meet the government’s regulations, for example. The question that raises is “Are the regulators trusted?” That question, it turns out, does not really have a simple “Yes” or “No” answer. Trust
Treat Trust as a Layered Thing Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: As I’ve written before, it is never safe to trust a potential juror’s own opinion about whether they are biased or not. That is because there has never been much support in the social science for that ability to self-diagnose. That, of course, has not stopped self-diagnosis from being the
Take It Seriously: Potential Jurors Cannot Self-Diagnose Their Bias Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: In one of the many classic scenes from “My Cousin Vinny,” the hapless defense attorney played by Joe Pesci, delivers his brief but to-the-point opening statement (“Yeah, everything that guy just said is bullshit… Thank you.”), only to have the judge respond, “The entire opening statement, with the exception of
Don’t Get Spanked (By Your Judge…If You Can Avoid It) Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Trial lawyers understand the need to refine and to help fit the main point of their case into the smallest possible container. In complex litigation, however, that quest for a bottom line can be elusive. You might have your one-line theme, and as much as that single expression can help
Know Your Trial Message Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Amid the chaos this week in the British Parliament, Prime Minister Boris Johnson referred to opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn, calling him a “chlorinated chicken” and, oddly, “a great big girl’s blouse.” While certainly original, the meaning of these particular metaphors might be lost, particularly to us on the Western side
Use ‘Fresh-Picked’ Metaphors Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Defendants in many areas of litigation are likely familiar at this point with the Reptile approach to trying plaintiffs’ cases. A central pillar of the strategy, and its namesake, is the idea that personally-relevant fear appeals can be wielded in order to awaken the primitive, or ‘reptile,’ regions of the
Consider This Version of the Reptile: It’s Not Fear, It’s Anger Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: In the real world, disputes are often settled by someone with more or better knowledge, or at least someone claiming to have more or better knowledge. The courtroom, however, is different. It is a setting that is designed to ensure equality of knowledge. When it comes to the information that