Bringing Opening Statements to Life With Visual Aids
Jeff S. Korek and Abraham Z. Melamed write: One extremely effective, yet fairly uncommon method of taking advantage of the first, and likely most important impression an attorney will make on a jury—a method that can potentially win a case from the start—involves the use of visual aids in conjunction with an opening statement.
November 20, 2015 at 05:28 PM
14 minute read
In the timeless classic “Twelve Angry Men,” the opening scene depicts a jury beginning deliberations over a criminal trial with a vote of 11-1 in favor of guilt. The single holdout begins to explain his reasons for doubting the guilt of the defendant, and over the course of the film he convinces the remaining 11 jurors that there exists reasonable doubt, and the verdict comes down in favor of acquittal; apologies for spoiling the film if you have not already seen it. As with many such films, there are quite a few lessons that one can learn from the plot, but one of the most important lessons from “Twelve Angry Men” is that very often jurors have decided how they plan to vote from the very start of the trial.
For example, in the beginning of “Twelve Angry Men,” when asked why he voted guilty, one juror stated, “well uh it's hard to put in to words. I just think he's guilty, I thought it was obvious from the word 'go.' I mean nobody proved otherwise.” When pressed for his reasoning for favoring guilt another juror yells, “for crying out loud the kid's own lawyer knew he didn't stand a chance. Right from the beginning, his own lawyer knew it, you could see it.”
Although the story of “Twelve Angry Men” may be fiction, it illustrates an important point. Many jurors make up their minds very early on in a trial, and then simply compile the evidence around the narrative they have already created. They listen to the opening statements of the lawyers and choose a side and stick with it. And once they have chosen a side it is very difficult to persuade them to switch. This demonstrates the extreme importance of a trial attorney's opening statement.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNY Judge Admonished for Writing Recommendation Letters for Pistol Licenses
'A Serious Crime': Venture Capitalist Sentenced to Prison for Trump-SPAC Insider Trading
Trending Stories
- 1The Law Firm Disrupted: Playing the Talent Game to Win
- 2Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 3GlaxoSmithKline Settles Most Zantac Lawsuits for $2.2B
- 4BD Settles Thousands of Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
- 5Monsanto Moves to Pause PCB Trial That Starts This Week
Who Got The Work
Blank Rome partner Andrew T. Hambelton has stepped in to defend Fragrancenet.com in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed Aug. 29 in New York Southern District Court by the Blakely Law Group, targets the defendants for allegedly selling counterfeit fragrance products. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Lorna G. Schofield, is 1:24-cv-06521, Abercrombie & Fitch Trading Co. v. Quester (US) Enterprises, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Davis Polk & Wardwell partners Mari Grace and Edmund Polubinski III have entered appearances for Australia-based Bitcoin-mining company Iris Energy and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Eastern District Court by the Rosen Law Firm, contends that the defendants concealed the inadequacy of the company's site in Childress County, Texas, including it being 'ill-equipped' and unable to operate the company's proprietary design. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Peggy Kuo, is 1:24-cv-07046, Williams-Israel v. Iris Energy Limited et al.
Who Got The Work
Ryan S. Stippich of Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren has entered an appearance for biopharmaceutical company Veru Inc. and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Sept. 30 in Wisconsin Western District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of June Ovadias, accuses the defendant of failing to disclose that small sample sizes and other issues rendered it unlikely that the FDA would grant Emergency Use Authorization for the cancer drug candidate sabizabulin as a potential treatment for COVID-19. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge William M. Conley, is 3:24-cv-00676, Ovadias, June v. Steiner, Mitchell et al.
Who Got The Work
Holland & Knight partners Cynthia A. Gierhart and Thomas Willcox Brooke have entered appearances for Pakistani American Political Action Committee and Rao Kamran Ali in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The action, filed Sept. 24 in District of Columbia District Court by Jackson Walker on behalf of Pakistani American Public Affairs Committee, accuses the defendants of using a mark that's confusingly similar to the plaintiff's 'Pak-Pac' marks without authorization. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Randolph D. Moss, is 1:24-cv-02727, Pakistani American Public Affairs Committee v. Pakistani American Political Action Committee et al.
Who Got The Work
Lauren M. Rosenberg and Yonatan Even of Cravath, Swaine & Moore have stepped in to represent Israel-based Oddity Tech Ltd. in a pending securities class action. The case, filed Aug. 30 in New York Southern District Court by Pomerantz LLP and Holzer & Holzer, contends that the defendant made materially misleading statements regarding the capability of Oddity's AI technology and ongoing civil litigation, resulting in the artifical inflation of the market price of Oddity's securities. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Margaret M. Garnett, is 1:24-cv-06571, Hoare v. Oddity Tech Ltd. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250