|
Cutting Edge Presentation Technology In "The Information Age"
by Rick Kraemer, Patrick McNicholas, Esq., Barbara Carter and Shar Blume
(originally presented at the 22st annual CAALA Los Vegas Convention, September, 2004)
Using cutting edge technology in trial can “cut” both ways. Used properly, it enhances and
streamlines your case and builds a platform of visual support, augmenting your role as an
advocate for your client. Used poorly, it can supplant your role as advocate, and technology
becomes “the advocate” and you become “the support”. This can weaken your critical
relationship with the judge and jury, and can lessen your credibility and negatively impact your
client. The critical relationship bridge you build with your personality and interaction with the
jurors can potentially be overwhelmed by technology, which can dominate attention, distract, or
just turn the jury off.
 The use of the variety of tools available today should be nearly “transparent” to the jury. Just as
the overuse of visuals in the news media can create visual fatigue, boredom, and loss of interest,
it can impact you adversely in the courtroom as well. An excess of graphics and visual effects
flattens the relationship with the viewer and loses the emotional connection to the audience.
Some of today’s popular news programs again incorporate a personality; such as Larry King Live,
Hannity and Colmes, or the O’Reilly Factor, re-injecting a personal dimension lacking on image
and graphic heavy news programs and hearkening back to the Cronkite era. Watching these
programs becomes more engaging as the visuals are more supportive as illustrations, rather than
as flash. What you remember are people and the stories. They still use plenty of graphics and
footage, but in a fashion which does not distract from the news personality and the story, and re-
engages the viewer.
Likewise, as an advocate you do not want to allow your presentation technology to take over or
dominate, causing you to lose your connection with the judge and jury. It is critical to maintain
your role and identity as the spokesperson for your client. Again, you don’t want the jury to view
the technology as the advocate and you as the support.
Developing a relationship with the judge and jury is based on trust. Trust is built on credibility
derived from accuracy and demeanor - your knowledge of facts and the law. Technology should
support that role to enhance the building of that relationship. It is also an asset in building your
credibility when used well – showing accurate information to the jury in an efficient form without
wasting their time. The various programs available have purpose here in allowing you to present
your case in a streamlined fashion and keep it real for the jury. PowerPoint, Trial Director,
Sanction, and Animation are tremendous assets when employed properly in the courtroom. Each
one has its strengths and weaknesses, therefore choose the proper program based on your
needs for presentation.
 PowerPoint has the advantage of giving focus and credibility to opening and most especially
closing arguments. The program facilitates efficient organization of case data, allowing you to
gather all the trial evidence as you go along. You then synthesize the material into a succinct
and orderly closing argument which highlights actual evidence admitted during trial, refocusing
the jury’s attention on it. Rather than asking the jury to rely on their memory or what was
written in their notes, you revisit evidence presented during trial in a more powerful fashion,
reviewing exact testimony or documents in a scripted and logical manner. Additionally,
incorporating video “clips” of testimony to show witnesses impeaching themselves, or an
animation to show how something happened, can be extremely helpful while you present your
client’s case. When used well, PowerPoint can build credibility and trust for you as advocate,
enhancing rapport with the jury.
It is recommended you have a trial technician who has rehearsed with you, so that you focus on
the jury, rather than on the technology. You want to make certain that their eyes are on you
and you direct their attention to the visuals as you go, or the material could dominate your
argument. The visuals should support, not distract from you. Likewise, keep your reading of the
material on the screen to the main points so that you don’t lose your jury. Remember the
“newsroom” model.
 One of the weaknesses of PowerPoint is that you are “locked in” to a presentation; if you require
a more interactive and on-the-fly presentation of evidence, trial software packages, such as
Sanction and Trial Director, are more appropriate to use. These tools are useful in managing
large databases of evidence for rapid recall and for highlighting important aspects of case
documents or testimony. They allow you to focus the jury on what matters most in a document.
As you present evidence, matters come up and you have the flexibility to rapidly recall any trial
document or video on-the-fly, comparing recent testimony with actual facts. They are best used
in an unscripted forum, allowing you to prompt for display of specific documents. While using an
Elmo can allow for similar on-the-fly display of documents, the placing of documents repeatedly
on an overhead projector, and the eye-bounce it causes, destroys the focus of rapidly presented
documents and objects.
Elmos or Doar machines are great in small document cases, or trials with tight budgets.
However, they are less precise and can waste time and make you look disorganized, lowering
your credibility and losing your audience just like a poorly produced news program.
Recent developmental differences in the user interfaces of trial software programs such as
Sanction and Trial Director have added enhancements which are visually more friendly and easier
to watch. Currently, Trial Director incorporates improved graphics tools and transitions, allowing
for even better display of video and documents. Again, having an experienced trial technician
present is critical, so you focus on being an advocate, instead of dealing with software. The
Achilles heel of on-the-fly presenting is not having the organization of a presentation locked in to
keep things flowing smoothly. You also lose audience attention while deciding what to show
and/or while you are looking for it. This technology is best used for daily trial display or
unscripted rebuttal. For linear arguments with time restrictions, stick to PowerPoint.
In all circumstances, it is critical to scout ahead, determine the size and layout of the courtroom
and check with the judge and see what will be allowed. You could waste time and money
preparing something which will not be allowed to be shown. Be certain to include exhibit
numbers on all documents and testimony in all your PowerPoint presentations, so it will be easy
to switch live to the actual document and then back to the presentation if you need to on-the-fly.
Again, this increases credibility and gives the jury the ability to jot down exhibit numbers for
reference when deliberating.
 Finally, don’t throw out the baby with the bath water. Just because you employ technology to
display anything you might need, dimensionality is important – don’t forget the boards and
models. The jury needs all the dimensions, plus they help tell the story better. Having a timeline
anchor board available at all times keeps the perspective better focused while you are showing
testimony or documents on screen. A player’s chart, an acronym board, and other visual exhibits
will round out that presentation, fully engaging the viewers.
The use of technology is expected – just as the current juror has evolved, and what was once hot
new technology has become a requirement. If the other side is using technology and you are
not, you could be giving up a huge advantage.
|
|
