![]() ![]() ( See Image 1.)Įven when budget is a significant factor, there are still ways to bring in the weapons of war. It would be hard to find a more powerful method of damaging the credibility of a witness than having them watch themselves on the big screen along with the jury as they are impeached via video testimony. Deposition video excerpts with closed-caption text may be used for impeachment purposes or absentee witnesses, and a document as viewed by the deponent can be displayed simultaneously. This is simply not possible when using a stack of hard-copy exhibits. On the contrary, this type of case may benefit even more, given the quick and effective manner in which evidence is displayed, offering jurors a way of engaging with the evidence. While a case with numerous photographs and/or other visual evidence might seem like an obvious choice for using technology (and it is), the other extreme would be a document-intensive case, in which there is seemingly nothing “sexy” to look at – just a bunch of boring documents. One type of trial is not necessarily better-suited for technology than another. Showing up at a mediation with a full-blown trial presentation can certainly have an impact on the proceedings. Settlement conferences, hearings, mediations, arbitrations and trials of all types can benefit greatly. Technology can be used for nearly any case, and at any stage. Fortunately, TrialDirector takes that into consideration, allowing for quick and random access of your entire evidence collection – including documents, photos, demonstratives, videotaped depositions and animations. Unfortunately, trial proceedings don’t always (if ever) go according to plans. A PowerPoint™ presentation is prepared, rehearsed and presented exactly as planned and designed, in a predetermined order, running from start to finish, with everything properly ordered in between. The strength of PowerPoint™ is also its weakness, however. Although PowerPoint™ is often used in trial, it is usually best reserved for use in opening statements and closing arguments – places in which the story is well-scripted and prepared, and where last-minute changes are unlikely. When this happens, it is the operator that can save the day or allow the ship to sink – experience is key. Although computer and program crashes are far less common these days than even only a few years ago, it can still happen. On the other hand, if you’ve seen it flow so smoothly that it appears anyone can do it you’ve likely witnessed someone who really knew what they were doing. If you’ve witnessed a techno-disaster in court, this may have influenced you to avoid becoming the next victim. In this article, we will cover some of the basics, in order that you might incorporate this “high-tech wizardry” into your trial practice. Regardless of your experience with trial presentation technology, it is now possible for you to represent your clients using state-of-the-art software such as TrialDirector. In fact, it has been suggested that as much as three to four times more evidence can be displayed during trial, and that trial time may be shortened by as much as 30 to 50 percent. If you’ve been involved in a trial in which one side used technology while the other didn’t, you may have noticed the stark contrast in presentation methods, and the overwhelming volume of evidence introduced via technology. ![]() You may have noticed the efficiency in getting evidence in front of the jury, and the effectiveness of getting everyone literally on the same page, and even the same paragraph with the key text highlighted. If you’ve been in trial within the past 10 years or so, you’ve likely seen technology used to present documents, demonstrative slides, photos, animations, videos and even videotaped depositions.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |