Follow me on Twitter

Blog archive

We Participate In:

ABA Journal Blawg 100!







Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Login

But they did it on purpose!

Friday, October 16, 2009
posted by Rita Handrich

outrageWe know that when we think someone hurt us on purpose, we are more angry and perhaps even morally indignant. The idea that we were hurt intentionally makes our blood boil (or tears flow). We know this anecdotally. And now, we know it to be scientifically true!

Harvard researchers have found that pain hurts more intensely if we think it is being inflicted intentionally rather than accidentally. The authors use the example of why we stay in abusive relationships—if we presume the hurt is accidental, it’s okay to stay. When we finally realize the hurt is intentional and will continue, we can often muster the courage and integrity to walk away.

This is an intriguing study because it speaks to the heart of telling the emotional story at trial.  You want jurors to have an emotional response—a connection to your story, to your client. You want them to ‘want to’ find for your client, and see him or her as a worthy recipient of their support. What this research tells us is that if the pain inflicted on your client was ‘intentional’, jurors may have a stronger emotional response to it. Here is how we might use this research finding to inform practice:

  • In a divorce case: S/he purposely deceived your client knowing full well that if these behaviors had been known, our client would have ended the relationship.
  • In a contract case: They entered into this verbal agreement with no intention of performance, their intent was simply to delay competitive progress while they worked on their own plans.
  • In an intellectual property case: S/he purposely worked with us to take our research findings to a competitor and secretly filed a patent application before ours was filed.

And so on. Your goal is simply to light the fire of moral indignation in the minds of the jurors. You want to answer both aspects of the common juror refrain “it may be legal but it sure isn’t right”. Show them it isn’t right. Show them it isn’t legal. Give them facts to buttress their feelings in deliberations.

Sometimes what feels wrong is still legal conduct.  That is unsatisfying to jurors, but they usually want to track the law.  But sometimes the law works as it should, and what is wrong is also illegal.  When that happens, jurors become engaged on a very personal level. Let them know:  “This one isn’t right AND it isn’t legal.”

Share


2 Responses to “But they did it on purpose!”

  1. [...] How we’ve manage to survive despite our tendency to misread one another’s actions, intentions and emotions, is often the subject of those who advise us how to choose and move juries — here — Anne Reed at Deliberations (explaining why "they" don't see things like "we" do here); and, the Jury Room (explaining why pain hurts more intensely when we believe it's been intentionally inflicted here).  [...]

  2. Anne Reed says:

    RT @KeeneTrial New blog post: But they did it on purpose! (The role of intent in moral indignation) http://bit.ly/14Xf4K. So true.

Leave a Reply