Things were going great.  You’d picked a fantastic jury, delivered an opening statement that got the jurors cheering for your client to win, and your first three direct examinations had gone better than you could have hoped.  Now, halfway through the direct examination of the day’s final witness, things are still going exactly as planned.  Your witness is completely prepared, easily answering all of your questions without hesitation, and the jurors are hanging on his every word, completely enraptured by the sound of his voice.  But then, midway through your examination, something unexpected happens when you ask this crucial question:

Q. “What is the worst fraternity on this campus?”

A. “Well that would be hard to say, sir.  They’re each outstanding in their own way…”

Every other time that you’ve asked this question during your pre-trial preparations with this witness, he’s been quick to identify the offending fraternity.  But now, his brain seems to have gone blank.

[With apologies in advance to Speed fans]:
“Ok, pop quiz, hotshot. The witness has just given you an answer you didn’t expect.  If you try to ignore it, the bad answer will destroy your case.  If you try to lead the witness to the correct answer, your opponent will object.  What do you do?  What do you do?”

First things first: DON’T PANIC! Far too often, attorneys (especially younger attorneys) lose their minds when they get unexpectedly bad responses from their witnesses.  The worst thing you can do at this point is to give your jurors the impression that you’ve just lost the case.  Chances are, the witness’s incorrect answer isn’t nearly as fatal as you think it is, so put on your poker face.  If you freak out, the jury will amplify the importance of the negative answer.  Just keep your cool — you can fix this.

The next step, before you start jumping through evidentiary hoops trying to refresh the witness’s recollection or establish a past recollection recorded, is to ensure that your witness really doesn’t remember.

“What do you mean, ‘ensure that he doesn’t remember’?  Of course he doesn’t remember, because otherwise he would have answered my question correctly!”

Actually, that’s not necessarily true.  Often, witnesses know the correct information, but the reason why they don’t answer correctly is because we ask them lousy questions.  Before you attempt to refresh his recollection, take responsibility for asking a lousy question, and then try asking your question a different way to see if that jogs his memory.  For example, set some parameters for your question, and make it easier for the witness to answer:

Q. “Based on their GPA’s and disciplinary records, what is the worst fraternity on this campus?”

A. “Oh, that would be Delta house, sir.”

Sometimes, that’s all you’ll need to do to get the right answer.  But if rephrasing the question doesn’t work, you can also try asking for the information in a different manner.  Are there other questions you could ask that get the same answer?  Consider stacking those questions on top of one another:

Q. “Who dropped a whole truckload of feces into the swim meet?”

A. “Delta house.”

Q. “Who delivered the medical school cadavers to the alumni dinner?”

A. “Delta house.”

Q. “Every Halloween, the trees are filled with underwear.  Every spring, the toilets explode.  Which house is responsible for these shenanigans?”

A. “Delta house.”

Q. “What is the worst fraternity on this campus?”

A. “Delta house, sir.”

Q. “Of course I’m talking about Delta, you TWERP!”

It’s not as graceful as the first method,  but it still gets you to the correct answer without having to ask any leading questions.  But let’s say none of these rephrasing techniques are working.  Regardless of how you rephrase the question, your witness still can’t remember.  What do you do then?  When you’ve exhausted rephrasing techniques, the next step is to refresh the witness’s recollection.

Jurors understand that witnesses sometimes need help remembering details.  For example, if I asked you what you were doing on July 10th of last year, you probably wouldn’t be able to remember.  But, if I gave you a chance to look at your calendar, you could probably tell me exactly where you were and what you did.  That’s the reason why the rules of evidence allow witnesses to refresh their recollection.  Here is the process you’ll need to follow to help your witnesses remember:

Step 1. Show that the witness can’t remember.

Q. “What is the worst fraternity on this campus?”

A. “I can’t remember.”
A. “I don’t know.”
A. “I cannot recall.”
A. “I used to know, but I can’t think of the answer right now.”

Showing the witness’s lack of memory is an essential step that can’t be overlooked.  Unless you can show that the witness doesn’t remember, you won’t be allowed to refresh his recollection.  There’s a world of difference between the witness who can’t remember and the witness who remembers the wrong answer.  You can’t refresh a witness’s recollection simply because he’s giving you a bad answer.  (You can impeach him, but you can’t refresh his memory.)

Step 2. Show that the witness previously remembered the information.

Q. “Did you used to know which fraternity was the worst on campus?”

Q. “Prior to today, did you have an independent memory of which fraternity was the worst one on campus?”

Q. “DId you previously remember which one was the worst?”

Step 3. Ask the witness if there’s anything that would help refresh his memory.

Q. “Would it refresh your recollection to look at your report?”

A. “Yes, if I could review my report, that would help me remember.”

Q. “Is there anything that would help you remember?”

A. “Yes, if I could smell a whiff of stale beer and listen to Otis Day and the Knights singing ‘Shout,’ I think that would refresh my memory.”

Q. “What do you need to help you remember?”

A. “If you’d let me smash a beer can against my forehead, that always triggers my memory.”

The important thing to remember about refreshing memory is that you’re not limited to showing the witness documentary evidence.  Typically, you’re going to use written documents to refresh witnesses’ memories, but understand that you’re not limited to paper exhibits.  If there’s anything that helps the witness remember, you should be permitted to use it to refresh their memory.

During this step, it’s often worthwhile to have the witness explain to the jury why the item will refresh his memory and why he needs some help to remember.  For example, let’s say you’re dealing with a police officer who makes lots of DUI arrests each year.  By the time the case reaches trial, it’s understandable that he might need some help remembering the exact details of this arrest, as opposed to the dozens of other cases he’s worked.  Before he uses his report to refresh his memory, you’d want to ask him about the report.  “How soon after the arrest did you write the report?  Why did you write it?  How detailed does it have to be?  How accurate are you when you write it?  What details do you include?  Is it intended to help you remember details about the case months, years, or even decades afterwards?”  By asking those details, you help show the jurors that the refreshed memory will be accurate.

Step 4. Show the refreshing item to opposing counsel.

Step 5. Show the refreshing item to the witness, asking the witness to examine the item silently, and then look back at you when he’s finished.

Step 6. Ask the witness if his memory has been refreshed.

Q. “Having reviewed your report, does that refresh your memory?”

Q. “Did smelling the stale beer and listening to ‘Shout’ help you remember what fraternity is the worst on campus?”

Q. “Now that you’ve smashed a beer can on your forehead, are you able to remember which fraternity is the worst on campus?”

[If the item doesn’t refresh his memory, you can still try to get the testimony in through the “Past Recollection Recorded” evidentiary predicate, but you won’t be able to use the “Refreshing Recollection” predicate.]

Step 7. Once the witness has refreshed his memory, re-ask your original question.

Q. “Now that you’ve refreshed your memory, please tell us, what is the worst fraternity on campus?”

A. “That would be Delta house.”

It’s a good practice tip to tell your witness to turn over the document before answering, so the jury can see that he’s testifying from his refreshed memory, and not merely reading aloud from the document.  The jury wants to see that the witness has an independent memory of what happened, and isn’t merely parroting what he just read.

Hopefully, you’ll never run into the problem of having a witness forget what to say.  But, if you decide to try cases in the real world, sooner or later, it’s bound to happen.  When it does, use these quick tips to help refresh your witness’s memory, and your case will be back on track before anyone even notices.

Share This

Two hunters are out in the woods when one of them collapses. He doesn’t seem to be breathing and his eyes are glazed. The other guy whips out his phone and calls the emergency services.

He gasps, “My friend is dead! What can I do?”

The operator says “Calm down. I can help. First, let’s make sure he’s dead.”

There is a silence, then two gunshots are heard. Back on the phone, the guy says “OK, now what?”

The first time you hear that joke, it’s hilarious. The second time, it’s still pretty funny. By the third time, however, it starts to lose its luster. That’s the danger of repetition. Yet despite the danger, nearly every trial lawyer I’ve ever met lives by some variation of this theme: “You’ve got to repeat your most important fact three times before the jurors will remember it.”

Indeed, it’s true:

Repetition makes it easier for jurors to remember important details.
Repetition makes it easier for jurors to remember important details.
Repetition makes it easier for jurors to remember important details.

Every trial lawyer knows that repeating information makes it easier for jurors to remember. However, experienced trial lawyers also know that just because something is important once, that doesn’t necessarily mean anybody wants to hear it again.

That’s the paradox of repetition. Repetition helps us remember, but it can also bore us to sleep. As the trial lawyer, your goal is repeat the information often enough that your jury remembers it, but without putting them to sleep. Here’s the good news: You can repeat repeat important information without boring your jurors, just so long as you follow a few simple guidelines.

First, modify each repetition. Unmodified repetition is a surefire cure for insomnia. The repeated information needs to be different than the first version. You can’t simply repeat it, because that’s not only boring, it’s condescending. Basically, unmodified repetition tells your jurors, “You dummies probably didn’t get this the first time, so I’m forced to repeat it for you.”

To avoid that problem, make sure that your second iteration differs from the first. For example, if you made your first point with oral direct examination, consider making your second repetition with a different medium, such as a demonstrative aid, video testimony, or a physical exhibit.

Second, repetitions need to get better. Each version should increase in strength. Start with your weakest iteration. Each successive repetition should be stronger, otherwise we lose our interest. For example, you could start with the verbal testimony, then add the photo, then add the demonstrative exhibit. Or you could start with the tamest description, and progress towards the strongest and most visceral description. You want to increase the intensity. If you start with a 10, your next witness can’t be a 9, because even though normally a 9 might be great, it doesn’t work in this situation.

It’s like watching Raiders of the Lost Ark, and then following it up with a double-feature showing of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and then Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. They’re both enjoyable movies, but they’re a bit of a letdown after watching the original. If you’re gonna repeat something, the second version needs to be more memorable. Think Godfather II and The Empire Strikes Back, rather than Jaws II and Rocky II.

Third, keep it interesting. That principle is a little vague, but important nonetheless. You can repeat information all day long, just so long as you keep the jury’s interest. But the moment it stops being interesting, you’ll lose them. Take the Rocky franchise for example. All of the movies are basically the same (Rocky faces unbeatable opponent, Rocky does montage training sequence to the best workout music ever written, Rocky fights the unbeatable opponent, “Yo, Adrian!”), yet despite the repetitive nature of the scripts, millions of people enjoyed all of the films. (Well, except for Rocky V — that one really sucked).

The same thing is true with Toy Story II, Spiderman III, and the James Bond franchise. Not only don’t audiences mind the repetition, they actually enjoy it, because each new version is interesting. Your jurors feel the same way. They don’t mind hearing the same information a second or third time, just so long as you hold their attention.

The importance of repetition during trial can’t be overstated. Jurors may miss an important point the first time it’s presented, so it’s usually essential to repeat the point a second or third time. However, you can’t afford to lose the jury’s attention by mindlessly repeating the same information over and over again. But if you vary how you repeat the information, improve each repetition, and keep things interesting, your jurors will remember all of the important details in your case.

Share This

The case was more serious than most.

The defendant was accused of sexually molesting a young child, and the evidence against him was strong. There was hardly a dry eye in the courtroom as the young girl described what the defendant had done to her. As the doctor described the girl’s injuries, you could feel the jurors’ horror turn to rage. By the time the detective testified about the defendant’s remorseless confession, the jurors were ready to convict and execute the sentence themselves.

Once the prosecutor had rested her case, the defense attorney rose and moved for a judgment of acquittal (directed verdict). That’s when things went awry.

Normally, in a case as strong as this one was, the motion for judgment of acquittal should have been merely a pro forma motion. But now, the judge was seriously considering granting the motion for acquittal. Why?

The defense attorney hadn’t attacked the strength of the molestation evidence. Instead, he said that the prosecutor hadn’t put forward any proof that the offense had occurred within the county lines. In every criminal case, the state needs to prove that the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter.

The prosecutor’s face turned ashen. She realized that the defense was right - she hadn’t proven venue. If she couldn’t quickly think of something, this case was going to be dismissed…

How can you avoid the same problem with your case?

Here’s an incredibly easy technique you can use to ensure you never lose a case because you omitted an essential element of your case: The Checklist!

“A checklist?”

That’s right. The same thing that helps you navigate your way through the grocery store can help you win your next trial. But your trial checklist is even more important than your grocery list. In trial, the stakes are high, emotions are high, and your mind is racing at breakneck speed. If you were ever going to accidentally overlook something, this would be the perfect opportunity. You’ve probably heard it said that “the faintest pencil mark is better than the sharpest memory,” right? That’s especially true during trial. So rather than risking an oversight, prepare the checklist while your mind is calm.

On your checklist, you should list every element you must prove to win your case. For example, let’s say you are prosecuting someone for the crime of Battery. (Don’t worry, defense attorneys, this article isn’t just for prosecutors and plaintiff’s lawyers - I’ll show you how the checklist can help you, too). Here in Florida, to prove a simple battery, you need to show that the defendant “touched or struck the victim against his will.” But you also need to prove that the defendant is the person who did it, and that the crime occurred within the court’s jurisdiction. Here’s how you would organize your checklist:

[  ] Identity
[X] Venue
[X] Touched or struck victim
[X] Against his will

As your witnesses testify to each element, you check it off the list. Before you rest your case, re-examine the list to ensure that every element has been proven. In this example, you wouldn’t want to rest your case yet, because you can quickly see that no one has identified the defendant as the person who committed these acts.

Using a checklist benefits defense attorneys, too. As the witnesses testify to each element, you check it off. When your opponent rests their case, if they haven’t put forward any proof of an element, you can focus your argument for JOA or directed verdict on the missing element. Defense attorneys can also use the checklist to present affirmative defenses, ensuring that you’ve met every element of the affirmative defense before you rest your case.

---

Unfortunately, in the sexual molestation case, the prosecutor hadn’t prepared a checklist. That’s why she found herself frantically asking for the court’s indulgence to re-open her case and prove the missing element. The judge, perhaps feeling that a case of this magnitude should be decided upon its merits, rather than on a technicality, allowed her to re-open the case, and she quickly showed that the crime had been committed within the county lines,

She was lucky. Don’t expect that you’ll be that lucky, too. On less serious cases, I’ve seen judges grant the judgment of acquittal to teach young prosecutors an important lesson. It’s certainly effective - I’ve never seen any of those attorneys repeat the same mistake. You, however, don’t need to suffer a judgment of acquittal or a directed verdict to learn the lesson. Prepare your checklist before trial, keep track of the testimony as witness’s testify, and you’ll never omit an essential element of your case.

Share This