If you’ve ever wondered whether the strategies we teach in Temple’s Trial Advocacy Program apply beyond the courtroom, look no further than Senator Mark Kelly’s (D-AZ) questioning of CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard during the March 25, 2025 Senate Intelligence Committee hearing. In a textbook application of the three
This essay is part of a White Paper being submitted to the International Academy of Trial Lawyers in support of a motion calling for abolition of the death penalty. I have been a capital case litigator for thirty-plus years in Pennsylvania in the United States of America. What does that connote? Since the early
In a law school class, one way to assess a student’s performance (and professionalism) is with Three Cs – consistency, clarity, and correctness. Considering the Vice President’s recent attack on federal judges for reviewing the constitutionality of various Trump policies, by the standards that would be used to assess a law student’s competence (and fitness
The difference between Pennsylvania’s approach to judges and expert ‘gatekeeping’ and that under the Federal Rules of Evidence is stark. For the Commonwealth and its Frye jurisprudence, judges are told to ‘leave science to the scientists.’ The proscription is clear and far-reaching: [T]rial courts may not question the merits of the expert’s scientific theories,
In the late 1800s, when a child wrote to a newspaper editor asking whether there is a Santa Claus, the editor replied in what became one of the most quoted and reprinted editorials ever: Yes, VIRGINIA, there is a Santa Claus. He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you
When Simon and Garfunkle wrote “listen to the sound of silence” they were not urging a principle applicable to hearsay analysis. But the Michigan Supreme Court took that notion to heart in a recent decision that ‘read between the lines’ and found that words never mentioned in court, but inferable from context, violate not only
As we approach the June 27 debate between President Biden and presumptive nominee Trump, much advice has been forthcoming as to how Mr. Biden should proceed. Written without benefit of polling data or focus groups, the below column makes suggestions based on persuasion techniques. To prevail in Thursday’s debate and then in the election,
Lay opinion testimony is tolerated because, frankly, it is hard to find the line between fact and opinion (“she is tall,” “they appeared drunk,” “the car was way over the speed limit”) and because lay witnesses should be comfortable speaking in normal, conversational, easily-understood terms. To ensure there is a foundation for the opinion rather
When a prospective juror says “I believe homosexuality is a sin” just like stealing, may that person be the “fair and impartial” juror? In a case brought by a lesbian prison guard whose claim is harassment on the job? The default answer should be “no.” Yet according to Justice Samuel Alito the answer is presumptively
Slow the video down It moves too fast But watch out it makes intent really last Feelin’ groovy (with apologies to Simon and Garfunkle) The proliferation of video evidence- body cameras, store security footage, ring cameras, and the ubiquitous hand-held cellphone – can’t be questioned. The use of video ranges from the high-profile cases, all