Where's the Video?

As mentioned in previous Things… articles, certain types of cases and jurisdictions lend themselves to jurors quickly suspecting a cover-up, even when those specific allegations aren’t being made.

The cover-up mindset can also affect other aspects of case evaluation – especially when it comes to allegations of “missing” video footage.  In today’s world, where video cameras are seemingly everywhere (on the street, waiting in line in Starbucks, in elevators, etc.), many jurors assume video footage of the incident in question exists – and become suspicious when told it does not.  In fact, when discussing dueling versions of events, the first juror question during focus groups often is, “Where’s the video?”

Especially in situations where cameras were in place but the footage is unaccounted for, skeptical jurors quickly suspect a cover-up, and we have seen plaintiff’s counsel play to those suspicions by using language such footage that has “gone missing” or has been “lost.”

We have found it useful to take the time to educate jurors about the video recording system and the data-collection system, and normalize such procedures as the overwriting of footage after a predetermined period of time – a practice some jurors are familiar with in their lines of work.  The vast infrastructure required to store years’ worth of around-the-clock, high-quality video footage from multiple cameras “just in case” would make Google blush.

Although a lack of video footage – whether because there were no cameras, or policy and procedure required overwriting after a certain number of weeks or months – creates significant challenges for the defense, it also presents an opportunity to get jurors invested in strongly considering both sides, thinking critically instead of emotionally, and taking it upon themselves to figure out the true story in the absence of video footage that might make the trial process easier for everyone.

We’ll note, too, for those times when there is video footage, testing it to find out how jurors interpret it – not just how you want them to interpret it – can be crucial.  Through focus groups and our online research process, we have prompted jurors to evaluate hundreds of hours of footage, including Taser videos, ER security camera footage and surveillance videos of plaintiffs walking, dancing and even rapping despite claims of debilitating injuries.  These findings can be game-changers in terms of how jurors view the entire case.

Whether you have video or not, give us a call to discuss how we can help you evaluate how this footage or lack thereof might shape jurors' perceptions of your case.

Life is eternal – at least when it comes to our consultations

When we state in our proposals that focus group and mock trials include consultation for the life of the case, we mean it.  Our clients have told us this is one of our best selling points, and one that we may not emphasize enough.

Whether it’s been five days, five weeks or five years since we conducted research with you, we are happy to provide further analysis of any new data or fact that has come your way in the interim (for example, a defendant has settled out or a crucial piece of evidence has been excluded), or produce a list of potential jury selection questions if trial has finally been set.  We do this because we care – we take a strong personal interest in each of our cases and oftentimes years after a focus group can still recite details of a key deposition or recall the language that switched jurors to your side.

If you have worked with us before and would like to talk through previous research with us, contact us anytime.