Tiger Woods should ask for a refund from all of his PR people. They did a poor job of preparing him for his much anticipated public statement on his maritial indiscretions. He looked like a deer in headlights and his delivery was robotic. He even had to look at his notes to thank the people in the room (see video on youtube).
Now contrast Tiger's apology with Bill Clinton's apology about the Lewinsky situation. Clinton was more comfortable and his delivery was deliberate but not robotic. His apology was significantly more believable than Tiger's (see video on youtube).
While the decision of whether a client is going to testify at trial is generally made by me and the client after the State rests its case, I begin preparing my clients months and months in advance of trial for the possibility that they may testify. I do not ever want my clients to come off rehearsed and robotic; I want their testimony to come out naturally, comfortably--I want them to tell a story not answer questions. While shortly before trial I will discuss potential cross-examination areas the State may get into with the client and practice some specific questions for direct examination, I have my clients practice their "story" months and months in advance of trial so they are comfortable telling their story. They should be able to tell their story as easily as recounting some high school experience or story about a great time on spring break. Juries do not like robots; don't make your clients robots; make them storytellers.
LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK?
G.J. Morse, Esq. Partner at Morse & Morse, LLC, Criminal Trial Attorneys, www.morselegal.com
READ: Techno-jury: Techniques in Verbal & Visual Persuasion: http://www.nyls.edu/user_files/1/3/4/17/49/946/Law%20Review%2054.1_Morse.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment