There was a time in this nation’s history when jurors knew the witnesses – they were neighbors or more – and had some sense of who was reliable and who was not, who was prone to lie and who could be counted on to tell the truth.[1] This was probably an imperfect tool, one subject
Can trial lawyers and advocacy teachers learn from a book about false confessions, moving beyond that specific problem to more general lessons about jurors, belief systems, and persuasion? The answer, at least if one reads DUPED, is a resounding “yes.” Let me take you to that book, the scary phenomenon of false confessions as they
I love teaching Barristers’ Orientation. The only reason I can think that other faculty don’t volunteer for this job is that they just want to squeeze the last possible drops out of their summer before they have to appear at the office for the start of the school year. I love teaching it because I
As advocacy teachers and advocates we thrust “theme” on our students and our audiences [jurors]. We do so with good cause – and we insist that it be embedded in the primacy moment of our presentation. Our students comply – with somber or indignant righteousness they intone the catchphrase of the case, be it the
It was one of the most surreal accident photographs I have ever seen, defying easy explanation. The lower half of a leg. Sturdy. The foot, bare. The toenails painted recently, but not so recently to be free of wear and blemish. The skin was clean with just a hint of mottling nearest to the site
Think of a Viking. A four word command, a simple task. And what pops into your mind? Is it something like this picture, like the fierce warrior Leif Erickson? That’s what transpired when the grave of a Viking was discovered in 1878. This is what was seen (an artist’s rendering): The assumption – a male
In a time before the open and watchful eye of technology, in an unknown part of the Midwest, in a town of a few hundred people, in the stillness of a cool and windless night, in four different rooms of a well-known farmhouse. In four blasts of a borrowed shotgun. In the Clutter family’s house.
Calling a witness a “Bimbo.” Making suggestive hand gestures. These were highlighted facets of two closing arguments in high-profile criminal trials in the calendar year 2022. Were they a reflection of our national political discourse; an attempt to be aggressive as part of zealous representation; or offensive, stupid and ineffectual? The final term – ineffectual
In a time before the open and watchful eye of technology, in an unknown part of the Midwest, in a town of a few hundred people, in the stillness of a cool and windless night, in four different rooms of a well-known farmhouse. In four blasts of a borrowed shotgun. In the Clutter family’s house.
Anecdotally, we know these truths to be self-evident – jurors find trials boring (at least many trials, after a while) and resent repetition. Some juror notes published by Judge Christina Habas reveal how the trial’s captive audience may feel about repetition. One juror exhibited their frustration with repetition by drawing a doodle in their notes.