Trial Presentation Consultant Robb Helt, of Litigation Resource Group, recently polled his jury, shortly after they came back with a favorable verdict. Their feedback is priceless, as it gets directly to the core of the matter as to whether we might look “too slick,” or like we have so much money that we can afford to drop a truckload of it into our trial presentation.
Let’s assume that most attorneys nowadays accept the fact that technology helps speed up a trial, that it aids in juror comprehension, and that they retain the evidence better than if they just listened to witness after witness, explaining fact after fact.
With those assumptions in place, the only real considerations left are cost, and whether the jury is sophisticated enough to accept the “high-tech” trial presentation – especially in a rural setting. While I won’t cover costs in this article, you can email me with questions and request a rate sheet.
So, if you’re in Los Angeles, New York, Washington, D.C., or another major city, it should be easy to decide. But, what if you’re in some remote part of Arkansas? While I cannot personally claim to have ever been in trial in Arkansas, Robb Helt has, plenty of times. Here is what the twelve most important people in the courtroom had to say about technology in trial:
This feedback, along with quotes from the Judiciary, indicate there are fewer excuses than ever for not bringing technology to trial. If presenting the best possible case for your client is important, you may want to consider trying your case with a little help from a Trial Presentation Consultant.