We once monitored a trial where the jurors returned a verdict in 32 minutes. They would have been faster, the foreman explained later, but they wanted to eat lunch before they started deliberating.
Jurors attributed the speedy defense verdict to attorneys who presented a simple, easily comprehensible story that was consistent from beginning to end of the 14-day trial.
Contrast that with the federal criminal trial of former Illinois Governor Rob Blagojevich, where deliberations alone took 14 days – and ended with a jury deadlocked on 23 of the 24 counts.
Jurors’ comments to the media reveal that the prosecutor’s case collapsed under the weight of its own complexity. “The majority of us felt it was confusing,” juror Eric Sarnello said. “It was all over the place.”
Consider what jurors were given to work with: more than a month’s worth of prosecution witnesses and 100 pages of jury instructions. Even more stunning is what they weren’t given, perhaps the most basic courtroom tool available: a timeline. This oversight forced jurors to spend hours of their deliberations doing what prosecutors should have done for them, piece together the dates and charges from 2001 to Blagojevich’s arrest in 2008.
Our case research has demonstrated that the side who presents the simpler story has the advantage. We suggest making sure before you go to trial that you can tell a compelling story in 30 seconds – basically, an “elevator pitch” for your case. If the other side can’t do this, so much the better.
While the Blagojevich jurors were 11-1 in favor of conviction on the other 23 counts – perhaps compelling evidence that the prosecution’s case was at least in some ways better than the defense’s – the fact is that when the standard is “beyond a reasonable doubt,” the need to streamline should be elevated as well. When this case is retried, prosecutors would be well-advised to remember that focus and restraint are paramount to helping jurors understand what a case is all about.
They would also be prudent to consider that the defense did exactly what it was supposed to do: create doubt through a straightfoward contention that the government had failed to prove its case, all without calling a single witness. “Zip,” is how Blagojevich’s lawyer described their defense.
It’s hard to make it much simpler than that.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment