In the past, in-person focus groups and mock trials ruled, because there wasn’t a better way.
But with the ease of use and widespread adoption of Zoom and other video streaming tools, we now have an alternative that solves the previously insurmountable sampling and logistical problems inherent in the traditional approach.
Our online Roundtable methodology is the culmination of 25 years of iteration and evolution of our research approach. Our Roundtables are superior to traditional mock trials for evaluating a case’s appeal to lay jurors—they are quicker to initiate, more flexible, and ensure a better sample of jurors, which in turn delivers more reliable and useful intel to the team. The fact that this methodology also costs less, capitalizes on the power of iteration, and is more convenient, is icing on the cake.
Our Roundtable methodology works in any venue, on any case-type. If you want to test big-picture themes, evaluate a key witness, test damages or competing liability theories, or determine which jurors you must exclude at trial, our methodology will get you what you need, on-time and on-budget. It is effective early or late in the cycle, and can be focused or broad in scope depending on your objective.
• Which facts and arguments do lay jurors reject/find most persuasive?
• What themes gain the most traction with jurors?
• How do jurors view the people involved?
• What questions do jurors want answered?
• What do jurors think of the plaintiff's damages claim?
• What is the impact of the key jury instructions and verdict form language?
Reach out to learn more.
Jury AppealTM Case Consulting
The quickest and least expensive way to work with us.
After a conflict check and a review of your selected case materials, we offer in-person or Zoom consults focused on
Simplifying your case
Developing persuasive themes
Downplaying or sidestepping problems
We can also help focus your jury selection strategy on the metrics that matter, streamline and improve the persuasive impact of opening and closing statements, and can provide specific advice to help deal with almost any problem you are facing.
Our experience in the courtroom and observing lay jurors deliberate verdicts has led to the development of The Best Evidence Method,℠ which represents the ongoing aggregation of our best thinking on jury selection and persuasion in high-stakes litigation.
Our jury selection approach incorporates simple and effective lines of inquiry designed to address and influence jurors' perceptions of critical verdict issues, including, among others:
> Hindsight bias
> The "burden of proof"
> Emotion vs Reason
> Evidence vs Argument
> Money for damages, and more
While our primary focus is on developing concepts with broad appeal, there will inevitably be prospective jurors that identify with our adversary, no matter how much time, effort, and creativity is spent on trial strategy. The challenge is to identify and remove these individuals, preferably for cause.
This is where voir dire scripting based on the relevant metrics from JuCE, our Juror Classification Engine and our Juror Analytics Database comes in.
We continue to train and refine JuCE with data from thousands of jurors polled over hundreds of cases. To date, we have identified over 40 characteristics the most extreme-awarding jurors tend to have in common, and JuCE continues to uncover more.
Jury selection is about more than just statistics and asking questions however, and our in-trial jury selection assistance fills the gap. We work closely with trial counsel throughout the entire process, focusing on crafting the most direct lines of inquiry to uncover the most relevant perspectives, while at the same time establishing a consistent pattern of language to begin branding our message and themes to the jury.
Jury Selection Techniques We Have Developed, Teach, and Employ
The three rules you cannot break in jury selection
The five goals we remain focused on like a laser (and you should too!)
The best way to ask about bias if you want to protect a juror
Short circuit hindsight bias with this short series of questions
How to locate and nurture the leaders in the group
The 6 questions you must ask in jury selection
5 characteristics extreme high-awarding jurors tend to have in common
The simplest technique for identifying those most susceptible to emotional pleas
Build trust to build self-cause strikes
Using rhetorical questions to “telegraph” acceptable answers
Using proverbs, quotations, and aphorisms to give your themes broader appeal
How to make the trial attorney appear to be a GUIDE through the evidence for jurors instead of a partisan hack
How to keep jurors talking – get them to tell you their biases and prejudices without having to probe
The 2 most important words in any malpractice or breach of duty case, and how to use them to your advantage
How to grab jurors’ attention and keep them alert and interested, even if it’s right after lunch
Cast doubt on the opposition’s expert witnesses when you use these voir dire questions
Use this technique when you know a prospective juror has a prejudice and refuses to admit it
Go beyond “gaining rapport”
What to do when a prospective juror says something devastating to your case
How to anchor a certain emotion or idea in voir dire, then repeat it so that a simple gesture can reinforce a key point through the trial
How to increase your chances of successful for cause challenges