On a budget?   Here are some software programs that will help you prepare for your next jury trialand won’t break the bank.  Most of these programs work on a variety of platforms, but since I’m a Mac guy, one or two of them might be Mac-only.

IMAGE EDITING PROGRAMS

GIMP: www.gimp.org
Need to crop photos, modify images, or enhance images for trial?  This is a cheap (free) alternative to Adobe Photoshop.   It includes a wide variety of image editing tools.   It’s not easy to get started, but it’s a powerful resource.

Seashore: www.seashore.sourceforge.net
A simple image editing program that’s easier to use than GIMP.

Inkscape: www.inkscape.org
This is an illustration program (similar to Adobe Illustrator) that lets you create vector drawings and illustrations. It doesn’t have all the bells and whistles of the professional program, but it lets you create amazing artwork.

Hugin: www.hugin.sourceforge.net
If you’re trying to take photos of a large, panoramic area, you usually can’t fit the entire scene into a single photo (at least not without a thousand dollar camera lens).  Hugin solves that problem by letting you stitch 2+ photos together into a panoramic view.

AUDIO EDITING PROGRAMS

Audacity: www.audacity.sourceforge.net
If your evidence includes audio recordings of depositions, interviews, or police interrogations, Audacity is an invaluable tool.  With this program, you’ll be able to edit audio recordings, extract smaller portions from extended interviews, and perform other audio editing functions. 

3D MODELS / CRIME SCENE MODELING

Sketchup: sketchup.google.com
Create 3D and 2D models, apply textures, and voila! you’ve created an interactive model of the crime scene!

Sweet Home 3d: www.sweethome3d.eu
Need to layout a residential crime scene or a slip & fall scenario? Sweet Home 3d can render home layouts, furnishings, and create floorplans.

OFFICE SUITE PROGRAMS

Scribus: www.scribus.net
This program is great for producing flyers, brochures, newsletters, etc.   You can use it to create posters or enlargements for use in direct examination or closing argument.

OpenOffice: www.openoffice.org
Can’t afford (or don’t trust) Microsoft Office? OpenOffice includes a full office suite programs.   You’ll get a word processor, spreadsheet, database, graphics, and presentation programs. 

Google Docs: docs.google.com
Create and edit web-based documents, spreadsheets, and presentations.  
The documents are stored online, so multiple parties can modify them at once (beware of attorney-client privilege violations).

AbiWord: www.abisource.com
This word processing program is similar to Microsoft Word.

PRODUCTIVITY PROGRAMS

Evernote: www.evernote.com
This program works on your computer, iPhone, PDA, etc.  You can synchronize your notes everywhere at once.  It’s invaluable for jotting down notes, websites, and more.

Freemind: www.freemind.sourceforge.net
Need to brainstorm new cross-examination questions?  Trying to organize your direct-examination, but not sure which topics you should address or which order you should present them in?  Freemind is a mind-mapping program.  If you’ve never used a mind-map before, it might take a little getting accustomed to, but it will make it much easier for you to get those brilliant ideas out of your head and onto paper.

TimeBridge: www.TimeBridge.com
If you’ve ever tried to schedule a meeting with several busy people, you know how difficult it can be to find a time that works for everyone.  This online meeting scheduler allows all of the invitees to choose a preferred meeting slot, then it finds tha day and time that work the best for everyone.

During closing arguments, your opponent may tell the jurors dozens of reasons why they should rule against you.  If you’re like most trial lawyers, you’ll want to address each and every one of those arguments during your opportunity for rebuttal.  But before you do, here’s a quick word of advice:

Don’t.

Responding to every argument is a knee-jerk response that many of us fall trap to.  You do it because you’re afraid that if you don’t counter every point your opponent makes, you’ll give the jurors justification to rule against your client and you’ll set yourself up for a malpractice complaint.  But in practice, not only is there no need to counter every argument, it can actually be detrimental to your case. 

Too many attorneys argue from their heels.  They backpeddle away from the strengths of their cases and respond to their opponent’s case from a defensive posture.  No one ever looks their strongest when they’re on the defensive, yet in courtrooms around the country, that’s exactly how most attorneys are presenting their closing arguments.  For example, when I critique attorneys during their closing arguments, I regularly see this scenario: The plaintiff attorney lists 27 reasons why the defendant is liable.  While he’s arguing, the defense attorney dutifully writes down every single one of those 27 arguments, and then spends the first 30 minutes of his closing argument responding to each and every point.  By the time he’s done responding to the plaintiff’s arguments, the jurors have lost any interest in listening to the rest of his closing argument, and they ignore the strongest arguments in his case.

So why do we do it?

The compulsion to counter every argument probably arose in law school, where you were awarded points for identifying every possible argument, no matter how ridiculous or non-persuasive it might be.  Although issue spotting is a useful exercise for developing your legal skills, it’s a dangerous practice when applied in the courtroom. 

Obviously, you don’t want to take a "wishful thinking" attitude and just hope that the jury ignores your opponent’s points.  If they poked some serious holes in your case, you better get out the duct tape and patch things up before you conclude your argument.  But for the most part, you don’t need to waste your time responding to every attack made against your case.

While it’s important that you counter your opponent’s strongest arguments, it’s also essential that you don’t lend credibility to impotent arguments by validating their existence.  In deciding which arguments to respond to and which ones to ignore, you need to move beyond issue-spotting and begin making the critical decision, "Should I respond to this argument, or should I ignore it?"  When deciding which arguments to ignore and which arguments to rebut, you’ll be evaluating the strength of each argument.  The strength of each argument will be determined by three factors: logical persuasiveness, legal persuasiveness, and emotional persuasiveness.  If an argument compels the jurors on emotional, logical, and legal levels, that’s an argument that probably must be rebutted.  If an argument is logically compelling but has no emotional or legal strength, maybe that’s one that you decide to ignore.

Responding to every argument dilutes the strength of your closing arguments.  Don’t let your opponent lead you down rabbit trails, because those trails never lead anywhere that you want to go.  Instead, stick to the theme of your case, argue your strongest points, and only address the arguments that you need to rebut.  When you do, your closing argument will be more persuasive, compelling the jurors to give you the verdict that your client deserves.

It was a serious DUI accident, and the issue was whether or not the jury would be allowed to hear the results of the defendant’s blood alcohol level test.  If the blood test results were deemed inadmissible, the plaintiff’s case would be significantly weakened, so both sides were extremely well prepared for the hearing.

The defense was the moving party, so they bore the initial burden of persuasion.  For their first witness, they called a toxicologist, and started with the routine questions about his background.  If you’ve ever called a witness to the stand, you’ve gone through a similar process.  You’ve asked witnesses where they went to school, what they majored in, when they graduated, etc.  In fact, if you’ve tried cases for any significant period of time, you’ve probably posed those types of questions to dozens, maybe even hundreds of different witnesses.

But let me ask you an important question: Do you listen to the answers?

Surprisingly, many lawyers don’t.  During direct examination, many lawyers are so busy thinking about their next question that they don’t bother listening to the witness.  After all, you already know what the answer is supposed to be, don’t you?

The problem with not listening to the witness is that you can ask stupid questions and appear foolish.  In this motion hearing, it was obvious that the attorney was prepared.  It was obvious that he’d spent a significant amount of time rehearsing with the expert witness.  It was obvious that he knew what the witness was expected to say.  But it was also obvious that he wasn’t listening to the witness.  And that’s what prompted this exchange:  

Q: Mr. Expert, what degree did you receive from the University of California – San Francisco?

Judge: He received a Master’s degree in Chemical Engineering from UC-SF in 1972, just as he said earlier.  Don’t waste our time by re-asking questions that the witness has already answered, counselor.  You have a limited amount of time to present your evidence and your arguments.  How you choose to use it is up to you, but in three hours, this hearing will be concluded, and you won’t get any additional time.

Ouch!  It stings to get called on the carpet like that, doesn’t it?  The worst thing about hearing those type of comments is knowing that the comments are true.  The only good thing about this exchange was that it didn’t happen while a jury was watching.  Luckily, these situations are easily avoidable.  Here are the two most common reasons why attorneys ask questions that have already been answered:

1. Relying too much on your notes.  When you write out every question word-for-word, it becomes difficult to escape from your “script.”  Here’s an example of what happens when you’re tied to your notes:

Q: Detective Steele, please introduce yourself to the jury by telling them your name and where you work.

A: Sure.  Hello, my name is Jack Steele, and I’ve worked as a Detective with the Capitol City Police Department for the past 16 years.  I’m currently assigned to the Celebrity Crimes division, which handles all of the cases that end up on TV or in the newspaper.  Whenever a celebrity is involved with a crime, it’s my job to conduct the investigation, get “doubles” of all the paparazzi photos, and handle all of the press conferences. 

Q: Could you please tell the jury what you do for a living?

A: Again?!?

Don’t get so attached to your notes that you can’t escape.  Rather than writing out questions word-for-word, use bullet points or an outline.  Yes, it requires thinking on your feet to formulate your questions, but it also forces you to listen to the witness, so you’ll ask better questions.

2. Not caring what the witness has to say.  When you work on a case for months or years, you’ll hear witnesses’ stories over and over and over again.  After a while, the novelty of their stories begins to wear off.  The problem with that arises when you get to court.  Since you knowexactly what your witnesses are going to say, you aren’t as fascinated by their stories as you were the first time you heard them.  As a result, you “hear” what the witnesses say, but you aren’t “listening” to what they say.

Here’s a clue: If you aren’t interested in what the witness has to say, what are the chances that your jury will care about what the witness has to say?

To avoid that problem, pretend that you’re hearing the witness testify for the very first time.  Demonstrate a genuine interest in what they’re saying.  Lean forward, make eye contact, and actively listen to what they say.  Don’t look at your notes or think about what question you’ll ask next.  Just focus on the witness, treating them as if they’re the most important person in the entire world. 

Why?  Because for that brief span of time while they’re on the witness stand, they are the most important person in your world.  Treat them like that, and you’ll never again get caught asking questions that have already been answered.

During trial, you need your mind and body operating at their peak performance levels.  You need to be able to object immediately when you hear potentially objectionable material, to think quickly on your feet when cross-examination takes an unexpected turn, and to look energetic and engaged when delivering your closing argument.  If your mind and body aren’t at 100%, you’re doing your client a great disservice.  That’s why you need to establish a morning ritual that helps you get the most out of the day and gives you the energy you need during trial.

Before we begin, let me acknowledge that most trial lawyers won’t follow this advice.  They’ll prepare for trial the same way they’ve always prepared, staying up late to burn the midnight oil, bolting out of bed in the morning, grabbing a cup of caffeine and rushing to the court on just a few hours sleep.  And by following that ritual, they’ll sabotage their chances for success in the courtroom.

If, however, you’d like to think better on your feet, to have more energy, and to feel more confident all day long, this simple change in your morning routine will dramatically improve your courtroom performance.

Every morning, the way you start your day will dictate how the rest of your day will unfold and will set the tone for your entire day.  If you’re serious about improving your performance during trial, you’ll need to establish a morning ritual to get the most out of the day and ensure that you’re productive all day long.  You want to create a morning ritual that renews, refreshes, and gets you fired up.  The ritual that you’re about to read will add about 60 minutes to your morning, so you’re going to need to wake up earlier.  But, if you follow these directions, you’re guaranteed to have more energy each day and be quicker on your feet during trial.

Here are the action steps for your morning ritual:

1. Start by drinking half a liter of water. During the night, your body gets dehydrated.  Chug a 1/2 liter of water first thing in the morning, and your body will thank you.  It helps to have a visual reminder, so put your water bottle next to your bed or someplace where you’ll see it when you wake up.

2. Brush, floss, etc. and take care of your personal hygiene. Take care of those pearly whites — the jury wants to see your smile!

3. Exercise for at least 30 minutes. Stretch, lift weights, do pushups, run… whatever you want to do, just use your body (that’s the definition of exercise, “the act of using”) and get your heart pumping.  This may sound counter-intuitive, but if you exercise first thing in the morning and get your heart rate elevated, you won’t be tired, you’ll actually have more energy for the rest of the day.

4. Meditate for 5-10 minutes.  Do NOT think about the trial or what you’re going to do in court today.  Just take some time to clear your mind and focus your thinking.  Breathe deeply, and relax.  (This might be the only time all day that you get to!)

5. Shower and clean up.

6. Eat a great first meal. Don’t grab an energy bar or a drive-thru breakfast – eat something healthy, balanced, natural, and organic.  Eat something that will fuel you for the day and give you the energy you need.  Here’s a good example:

Blueberry-Honey Breakfast Shake (makes 2 servings)

* 1/2 cup fresh or frozen blueberries

* 1/2 cup low-fat vanilla yogurt

* 1/2 cup low-fat milk

* 2 tablespoons honey

* 5 ice cubes

Throw everything in the blender and hit “frappe” to have a healthy breakfast ready to go in under 2 minutes.

When creating your morning ritual, it’s important to plan it specifically and give yourself enough time to accomplish everything. Give yourself an extra 10-15 minutes for the “on ramp” to your success ritual, so you can handle all of the “Where are my shoes?”  “Where’s the water?”, etc. situations and give yourself some time to get geared up. Also, give yourself 10-15 minutes for the “off ramp” to gear into your regular day.
(This probably means that you’re going to have to wake up earlier, which means you can’t go to bed at 2 AM.  Getting a full night’s sleep will also contribute to a successful day in court.)

Finally, here’s the most important part: You need to start doing this immediately.  That means first thing tomorrow morning, you should be on the first day of your program.  Don’t put it off — in the words of the Nike ad, “Just do it.”   Because if you don’t do it tomorrow, you won’t do it on Monday, either, and you certainly won’t do it the first day of trial.  However, when you do, you’ll be guaranteed to have more energy, sharper focus, and more confidence than you’ve ever had before.  Good luck!

How honest are your potential jurors?  I don’t know about you, but lately, I’ve seen a rash of lying jurors.  And the sad part is, there doesn’t seem to be any guaranteed way to catch them.  In a recent two week span, I selected juries for five different cases.  And in almost every single case, at least one juror lied to me, my opponent, or the court.

In criminal cases, one of the issues I almost always inquire about is whether any of the jurors have ever been charged with a crime.   I explain that it doesn’t matter whether it was a misdemeanor or a felony, and it doesn’t matter whether it was dismissed or whether they went to prison.  Usually, I’ll ask a question like, “Have you, or someone close to you, ever been arrested or charged with a crime?”  Then I’ll ask for a show of hands to see who falls into that category.  Probably every criminal prosecutor and defense attorney asks something similar.  They understand how important it is to know whether or not any of the potential jurors have ever been charged with a crime. 

In the five cases I recently tried, every juror on every panel was asked whether they had ever been charged with a crime.

But here’s the interesting twist: I wasn’t trying to discover whether or not they’d ever been charged with a crime — I wanted to determine who would be honest about it.  I already knew what their answers should be.  In our jurisdiction, we have access to a statewide criminal history program, and run a criminal history check on every potential juror.  In addition, I have a computer in the courtroom, and can pull up more detailed information from the clerk’s office or the case management system. 

Every juror on every panel was asked whether they had ever been charged with a crime, and in almost every single case, at least one of them lied.

After we completed questioning of the entire panel, we asked the judge to bring some of the jurors back into the courtroom for individual questioning.  Almost without fail, once we confronted them about their lie, they would admit the truth.  We heard a variety of reasons why they hadn’t been honest:

One said he’d “forgotten.”  “Forgotten?!?”  This guy wasn’t just given a ticket or a Notice to Appear — he’d spent the night in jail.  Quick, do me a favor and take this pop quiz: How many times have you ever been handcuffed, arrested, and transported to the county jail?  Is that something you “forget?”  (Especially if it only happened 4 or 5 years ago…)

I asked another, “Why didn’t you tell us about the time two years ago when you were sentenced to probation after you got caught acting as a lookout for a burglary?”  Confronted with the details, he shifted uncomfortably in his chair, then said he thought it didn’t count, because he hadn’t been adjudicated.

There were a few other notable comments, but the most memorable was the guy who’d been arrested, convicted of a crime of violence, and sentenced to a lengthy jail sentence.  His reason for not telling us?  He just didn’t want to.  If I hadn’t had the details of his arrest and conviction in front of me, we never would have learned about his prior arrest.

Unfortunately, these lies may not be uncovered until after they’ve affected your verdict.  For example, earlier this year, a $28,000,000 plaintiff’s verdict was thrown out and a new trial ordered because three jurors lied during jury selection.  The defense attorney had asked whether anyone had ever been involved in a lawsuit.  Two of the jurors didn’t raise their hands at all (one had been sued twice, the other three times), and the third admitted she’d filed a lawsuit, but didn’t mention the other nine times that she’d been sued.

We don’t want to believe it, but some potential jurors will lie to us.  These lies affect the integrity of the jury system and the validity of your verdict.  I wish I could give you a secret formula for catching every lie and keeping those potential jurors off of your jury, but there’s no perfect solution.  The best I can recommend is that you make a clear record so that you can ask the court for help if you do uncover a lie.

If you ask, “Has anyone ever been arrested for any crime?” and none of the jurors raise their hands, make sure you create a record.  Say something like, “None of the potential jurors raised their hands”  or, “Let the record reflect that no one has raised their hand.”  Then, if you discover that one of the jurors has a criminal record, the court will have something to act upon.  Without that statement, your appellate record will be ambiguous as to whether or not the any jurors responded to your question.

You won’t be able to catch every lie, and not every lie you catch may matter. But if you do catch someone in a lie and you think it affected your verdict, make sure you have a record that lets the court help you out.