 Your side’s version of “what really happened”  Logical  Fit the legal requirements of the claims or defenses  Be simple to understand  Be consistent with the jurors’ common sense and their perception of how real life works

 Memorable word or phrase that summarizes your theory  Emotionally compelling  Incorporate jurors sense of fairness and universal truths  Simple  Focus on people, not issues  Should translate “legalese” into simple, compelling, human propositions that are consistent with the attitudes jurors already hold about people, events, and life in general.

 Libel/Slander case:  Defense: Lukas Reiter was caught red-handed, and now he wants someone else to pay for his affair.  Plaintiff: Richard McKyton made a jealous jump to conclusions.  Murder/Self Defense case:  Defense 1: With her back up against the wall and her roommate threatening to kill her, Ms. Hughes had run out of options.  Prosecution 1: Pat Hughes took the law into her own hands.  Defense 2: Facing death, Sarah Baker did what all living things are instinctively programmed to do…she defended herself.  Counterfeit case – missing “other suspect”:  Defense: Reggie Jefferson had the perfect cover: A trusting roommate with the same initials.  Negligence:  Defense: It is every driver’s worst nightmare. A small child darts into the road.

 Tell a story  Focus on the people, not the problem. Who are the important players? Personalize your party  Make the story vivid. Re-create the incident. Make it emotional and dramatic  KEEP IT SIMPLE.  Be Logical and concise.  Walk the jurors through the events in chronological order.  Anticipate the other side’s weaknesses

 Don’t overstate the evidence  Don’t include your personal opinions  Don’t argue -at least not in an obvious way

1. Introduction 2. Parties – introduce essential people 3. Scene – paint a picture for the jury 4. Issue – what is the main issue? 5. What happened – get the jury to believe your side of the story 6. Basis of guilt/non-guilt – why your side should win 7. Anticipating and refuting the other side 8. Conclusion - Simply and directly tell jury that facts of the case will support his/her side, and ask for a verdict.

1. Grabber beginning – quick summary of theme/theory that draws jurors in 2. Introduction – who are you and who do you represent? (or do this first) 3. Facts/Witnesses – Tell the story 1. Paint the scenes and introduce the players as they come up 4. Short close – return to/restate your theme 5. Charge the jury – tell them what you’re going to ask them to find

 Ask direct examination to witnesses on your team  Give them an opportunity to tell the jury the story you want them to hear  Attorney’s role as the “background player”  Attorney is the “facilitator” to help the witness tell the story

 NON-LEADING QUESTIONS!!!!!!  All questions should begin with “who”, “what, “when”, “where”, “why” and “how”  You can also phrase a question with “did there ever come a time when...”  Do NOT let your witnesses on direct examination give a long narrative. That is objectionable. They must answer the question and nothing more.

 Ask cross-examination of witnesses from the other team  Opportunity for attorney to “poke holes” in opponent’s story  Attorney should be “star of the show”  Attorney can walk about the floor more, make reasonable gestures

 Use LEADING QUESTIONS!!!! (abandon use of who, what, when, where, why format)  Suggest the answer in a question to trick witness. (Example: “So you were in the house when your friend called?” If they answer just “yes”, they have confirmed being in the house at the time of receiving the call).  Do NOT ask open ended questions that would allow witness to explain; keep them on a short rope.  “Angry” parent grilling child who had been out all night partying

 Address everyone with respect and dignity  Judges are referred to as “Your Honor”  Always stand up when Judge enters room as well as when Judge gets up from seat  Always referred to opposing counsel as my “esteemed colleague” or “Mr.____” or “Ms.____”  Never appear angry in court (but “shock”, “dismay” or “passionate” on behalf of your client is completely fine)