<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The jury will believe what you say, until they have time to think about it</title>
	<atom:link href="http://keenetrial.com/blog/2009/11/16/the-jury-will-believe-what-you-say-until-they-have-time-to-think-about-it/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://keenetrial.com/blog/2009/11/16/the-jury-will-believe-what-you-say-until-they-have-time-to-think-about-it/</link>
	<description>You Know Law. We Know Juries.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:48:52 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Doug Keene</title>
		<link>http://keenetrial.com/blog/2009/11/16/the-jury-will-believe-what-you-say-until-they-have-time-to-think-about-it/comment-page-1/#comment-861</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug Keene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:56:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://keenetrial.com/blog/?p=546#comment-861</guid>
		<description>Tim,

Your point is so true!  When we do pre-trial focus groups I recommend to my clients that the most efficient use of time is to have the case facts and testimony presented in a narrative, but to also make brief cuts from the depositions of key witnesses and show them to the jurors.  What I find is that in less than 5 minutes of observing a witness, the jurors have come to very firm opinions about the character of the person.  If we have a problematic witness, an important part of trial strategy involves determining how to create an identity for the witness that allows him or her to be more warmly received.  

Thanks for your encouraging comments.  I hope others add their experience and observations to the blog.  We love writing it, and enjoy the dialogue with readers.

Doug Keene
Keene Trial Consulting</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tim,</p>
<p>Your point is so true!  When we do pre-trial focus groups I recommend to my clients that the most efficient use of time is to have the case facts and testimony presented in a narrative, but to also make brief cuts from the depositions of key witnesses and show them to the jurors.  What I find is that in less than 5 minutes of observing a witness, the jurors have come to very firm opinions about the character of the person.  If we have a problematic witness, an important part of trial strategy involves determining how to create an identity for the witness that allows him or her to be more warmly received.  </p>
<p>Thanks for your encouraging comments.  I hope others add their experience and observations to the blog.  We love writing it, and enjoy the dialogue with readers.</p>
<p>Doug Keene<br />
Keene Trial Consulting</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Timothy R. Hughes</title>
		<link>http://keenetrial.com/blog/2009/11/16/the-jury-will-believe-what-you-say-until-they-have-time-to-think-about-it/comment-page-1/#comment-860</link>
		<dc:creator>Timothy R. Hughes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://keenetrial.com/blog/?p=546#comment-860</guid>
		<description>Douglas,
You are so on the money on this post.  I still remember paying a price on this one when during a trial, a witness came back from out of the area, testified and fell apart making factual admissions no one in the case had ever heard (and yes I grilled him before and prepped him, it was an epic fail).

That McDonald&#039;s case is another one that people have so much pre-judgment on.  Their information has been so shaped without knowing the underlying facts, great example.  As someone who handled a lot of insurance defense matters, I came in probably skeptical towards the plaintiff until I read more about the actual evidence, proof, and damages in that case.

Keep up the good work!
Timothy R. Hughes
http://www.valanduseconstructionlaw.com
@vaconstruction</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Douglas,<br />
You are so on the money on this post.  I still remember paying a price on this one when during a trial, a witness came back from out of the area, testified and fell apart making factual admissions no one in the case had ever heard (and yes I grilled him before and prepped him, it was an epic fail).</p>
<p>That McDonald&#8217;s case is another one that people have so much pre-judgment on.  Their information has been so shaped without knowing the underlying facts, great example.  As someone who handled a lot of insurance defense matters, I came in probably skeptical towards the plaintiff until I read more about the actual evidence, proof, and damages in that case.</p>
<p>Keep up the good work!<br />
Timothy R. Hughes<br />
<a href="http://www.valanduseconstructionlaw.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.valanduseconstructionlaw.com</a><br />
@vaconstruction</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
