By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Rushing into the courtroom, late in returning from a break, the lawyer stood before the already seated jury, red-faced, but with a self-deprecating smile. “Ladies and gentlemen, this is what every lawyer fears, and I’m truly…mortified to have kept you waiting.” And the jury responded not with irritation, but with
Don’t Be Afraid of a Little Humiliation in the Courtroom Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm – Aristotle, the original philosopher of communication, wrote in The Nicomachean Ethics about “the Golden Mean, ” or the idea that virtue is often a happy medium between two vices (for example, courage is the virtue wedged between the vices of recklessness on the one hand, and cowardice on the other). More
Aim Your Damages, And Your Case, at “The Golden Mean” Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm – In a recent viral video on YouTube an old couple peers into a computer webcam, trying to figure out how to operate the device, not realizing that they are recording themselves. Beyond providing a charming vignette, the clip might also be seen as a window into the future of the American jury.
Account for the Graying of Your Jury Pool Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm – Your case has finally gone to the jury, and the panel is now ensconced in the jury room. What are they doing in there? Are they carefully and logically arguing the merits of your case, considering all sides until the truth wins out? If you have ever watched a closed-circuit feed of mock jury deliberations,
No Blank Slate (Part 2): In Closing, Treat Your Jurors as Instrumental Arguers Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm – The Plaintiff’s opening statement in the medical malpractice trial began predictably: This is a case about “incompetence,” and “arrogance,” and “dangerous decisions,” jurors heard. But rather than fostering even an initial leaning against the doctor, this message brought about a defensive response. Jurors were left feeling that all their stereotypes about medical lawsuits and
No Blank Slate (Part 1): In Opening, Treat Your Jurors as Motivated Reasoners Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm – This blog frequently covers recent psychological or communications research bearing on legal persuasion, and an important question is how well results hold up when leaving the laboratory and entering the courtroom. One example is the phenomenon of damage “anchoring,” or the advantage gained when one side offers an ad damnum number as a starting point for jury deliberations.
When Arguing Damages, “Drop Anchor” Even in Murky Waters Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm – During a recent trial, a witness was about to leave the stand as a slip of paper with a question emerged from the jury. The note was enough to make the examining counsel’s blood run cold, as the juror asked the witness, “Isn’t [your attorney] signalling you on how to answer by nodding his head to indicate ‘yes,’ or ‘no’?
Remember in Court, If You’re in View, Then You’re on Stage Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm – With Standard & Poor’s recent decision to deny the U.S. a AAA credit rating, many Americans are feeling a little downgraded about now. For most of us, I can hope, that is a temporary feeling. But for others, especially in these economic times, it is a more constant aspect of their lives. These Americans,
Beware of Jurors Who Feel Downgraded Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm – “Well…let me just throw a number out to get us rolling: Five million dollars!” (Recent mock juror quote) Juror damage awards can seem erratic and inexplicable, not only to the public, but to experienced litigators as well. Particularly when jurors are valuing something other than a concrete expense by assessing non-economic
Get the Gist of How Jurors Decide Damage Numbers Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm – “I know how to explain it, and I think I even know how to persuade jurors on it — but how do I make it central for them? How do I make this fact the first thing they remember about this case?” That question, asked recently by an attorney