"You Need a Timeline!"

Timelines are essential to just about any case. I’ve been teased by various attorneys I’ve worked with that I always recommend a timeline, and indeed it’s true.

But there is method to my repeated "You need a timeline!" Movement of events across time is how jurors anchor testimony in their minds. It’s how they create “story” for themselves.

And story is the single most compelling way to get facts and information across to the jurors in a coherent, persuasive manner.

The reason a timeline works so well, is it answers the fundamental question of story-telling: “And then what happened?” It ties together apparently disparate testimony or pieces of evidence. It grounds any narrative in logic, by assigning order to the events.

Timelines need to be designed around a horizontal axis representing time, with “flags” or “boxes” pegged at the appropriate moments in time. Timelines don’t need to be fancy, but different entities should have different colored “flags,” for example, to differentiate them easily. Beyond that, a graphics designer can help give a timeline more visual impact.

The temptation is often to put too much information on a timeline: it’s a tool meant to emphasize and support, not reiterate all the testimony. Several uncluttered, easy-to-read timelines are better than a single one crowded with too much for the eye to readily grasp.

It Takes A Village: Yet Another Focus Group Advantage

I consulted on a case recently where one of the possible witnesses was an individual in a highly respected line of work. This person had some 30-odd years ago been involved in criminal activity, but in the years since had made a wonderful turn-around, and was a veritable pillar of the community, loved and respected.

The attorneys who had interacted with the witness said she was credible, quite charming, and would no doubt make an excellent witness.

With such a brilliant present, would the past matter? The attorneys and I weren’t sure, and figured the best way to find out would be to present the witness to a focus group. Not live, that’s rarely possible, but in a video clip.

Imagine our surprise when what struck the focus group members wasn’t the long-ago criminal activity, but the witness’s “smarmy-ness.” They didn’t find the witness charming, they thought she was smirking. The focus group members stated the witness wasn’t taking the present matter seriously, that her attitude was entirely too cavalier. They did not find her credible at all.

With that, since the witness’s appearance at trial was not obligatory, it was quickly decided NOT to have the witness take the stand. We would never have realized the impact of this particular individual had it not been for the valuable input of the focus group members.

Once again, a focus group saved the day.

Use "Less is More" to Win in Court

Some courts are lenient with the amount of time allotted for a trial, some are not. It certainly can seem impossible, sometimes, to jam the amount of evidence and testimony you have in the number of hours permitted.

And yet, as is so often true of many things in life "Less is more."

This was strongly brought back to mind upon reading one alternate juror’s response to the verdict in the recent case against Trenton, Ohio Mayor Tony Mack,  as reported in The Trentonian. The alternate juror, Sherie Jackson, was distressed as she explained to the Judge in a letter post-trial, by what she considered a "rushed verdict" that was arrived at precipitously because: "In the jury room, I heard of plans to go on a cruise, to a relative's wedding and an overall atmosphere of impatience as the trial stretched on" — for a month and one day.

Jurors who may have had the patience to sit through long trials and long deliberations some 10 or so years ago, are no longer willing to be held hostage past what they consider a sufficient rendering of the facts and testimony. Our world has sped up tremendously: we abbreviate everything, we rely on bullets and headlines, we expect everything to happen quickly.

This is one of the great advantages of focus groups: attorneys are forced to reduce their entire case to a mere hour and a half, which puts a glaring spotlight on what is essential and what could be left aside.

Yes, you still must get across your points, you must still develop testimony and present evidence appropriately. However, in my experience, a great deal can often be trimmed from the presentation of your case without losing impact. If anything, you generally gain impact from being succinct.