Although Hollywood courtroom drama movies often glorify lawyers' closing arguments, in point of fact, the opening statement might be the one most significant event of a trial.
It was like this the case within the hush money trial against former President Donald Trump and alleged payments Pornstar Stormy Daniels as lawyers for either side presented theirs Opening speeches on April 22, 2024 in New York.
In this caseManhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg accused the previous president 34 crimes of falsifying business records before the 2016 presidential election to influence voters' knowledge of him. Trump pleaded not guilty.
While his opening statement, prosecutor Matthew Colangelo told jurors that Trump was a part of a conspiracy to cover negative details about him to assist get him elected. “He then covered up this conspiracy by lying over and over again in his New York business filings,” Colangelo said.
Attorney Todd Blanche was chargeable for Trump's defense. “President Trump has committed no crimes.”
Blanche explained that Trump was “not involved and unaware of the details of the hush money payments” because he left every little thing to Michael Cohen, his former lawyer and fixer who is predicted to testify before the prosecution. Blanche described Cohen as a “criminal” who was “obsessed” with Trump and searching for personal revenge.
How will these conflicting opening arguments impact the jury?
Academic psychologists tell us that between 65% and 75% of jurors make up your mind a couple of case after the opening statement. What's much more incredible is that this 85% of those jurors maintaining the position they formed thereafter the opening speech Once all of the evidence is presented and the method is complete.
In most cases, it is just too late to win over the jury through closing arguments.
This phenomenon isn’t any surprise to experienced litigators. You're accustomed to two theories that outline how jurors – actually, people typically – process information: the concepts of Primacy and topicality.
These ideas suggest that jurors remember best what they hear first and what they hear last. Therefore, it’s critical for attorneys on either side to start their opening arguments with a bang.
The psychology of the jury
I taught a course about it Litigation representation at Harvard Law School for twenty years. Part of my curriculum involves teaching aspiring attorneys the best way to give effective opening statements.
If the goal is to persuade the jury by the top of the attorney's opening statement, how does that work in practice?
Trial attorneys who’re deep in research know that jurors reply to a well thought out theory of the case, interrupted by a succinct topic.
A theory of the case is a brief statement of three to 5 sentences, just like an elevator pitch. The theme is a brief, concise summary of the speculation of the case that is straightforward for a juror to recollect. The topic is commonly the primary sentence out of the lawyer's mouth, followed by a more detailed description of the speculation.
In fact, the very first skill I teach in my course at Harvard is developing theories and themes. To effectively convey a theory in a case, many attorneys begin their opening statement with “This is about…” after which fill in the precise details.
This is what happened on the primary day of Trump's trial.
“This case is about a criminal conspiracy and fraud,” Colangelo, the prosecutor, told jurors. “Defendant Donald Trump orchestrated a criminal plan to rig the 2016 presidential election.”
Kena Betancur/Getty Images
In stark contrast, Trump's defenders said, “There's nothing wrong with influencing an election. That's called democracy.”
Although prosecutors have tried to place a “dark” tone on the matter, Blanche says jurors will learn that there isn’t any crime involved.
In each example, the jury is given enough information to border the evidence they may hear through the trial.
After either side complete their openings, data will show that greater than two-thirds of the jury could have reached a choice that can stand for the remainder of the trial.
Why do jurors are likely to behave this fashion?
Research has also taught trial lawyers that if you happen to connect the jury together with your theory of a case at first of the trial, the jury will view all remaining evidence – no matter whether it’s potentially helpful to the prosecution or defense – through the prism of process this theory.
The importance of opening statements can’t be overemphasized. They set the tone and supply a framework for the jury to know the testimony they may hear in the approaching months.
Material utilized in this story was originally published on April 22, 2024.
image credit : theconversation.com