Paul Luvera, The Daily Record Newswire
When analyzing the demeanor of a plaintiff’s trial lawyer, one should keep in mind how jurors and judges arrive at their viewpoints, opinions and verdicts. Medical research involving functional magnetic resonance imaging has confirmed the majority of our decisional thought-processing occurs at a subconscious level.
Our impressions and decisions are not logical, but part of a process that occurs without our conscious involvement. These conclusions, however, are always rationalized by our conscious mind that insists there be a reason for everything we do.
Why is that fact important? Because it means a trial is really a struggle of impressions, not a struggle of logic. Therefore, the impressions we and our witnesses create are critical to the outcome of the case.
We also know that nonverbal expression is important and must always be congruent with our verbal communication. How we act, the way we talk and the way we move become an important part of the process by which jurors form impressions and ultimately arrive at verdicts. Consequently, our courtroom demeanor carries a considerable amount of importance regarding the outcome of the case.
Let’s look at the trial from the typical jurors’ stereotyping of lawyers, especially plaintiffs’ lawyers. They do not trust the plaintiff’s lawyer, who they know wants them to give money away. They have been conditioned to believe the lawyer is devious and will try to put something over on them. They arrive at the courtroom with their guard up, just as we do when we know a salesperson wants to sell us something.
Therefore, our primary goal is to put ourselves outside the expected stereotype. We want to demonstrate that we are credible and trustworthy, an exception. If we are outside of the image of what they expect, we’re more likely to be trusted.
But it is how we interact with people during the trial that carries the most significance. Arrogance on the part of the lawyer or a witness will seal the fate of either in the eyes of the jury.
To communicate the right impression we must treat everyone with respect and be professional in our words and conduct at all times. That applies not only to how we treat and speak to the judge; it also includes court personnel, the bailiff, the clerk, the court reporter and anyone else who works in the courtroom.
The need for a professional, respectful demeanor applies to your treatment of your opponents as well. You will have, on occasion, the win-at-any-cost foe. You can’t control what your opponent does; you can only control how you deal with it. If you engage in an exchange-of-kind, you lose ground.
You should hope your opponent is that kind of ruthless advocate, because it will be impossible for him or her to conceal the jury’s corresponding realization over a long trial. Eventually, the jurors will collectively recognize the lawyer’s nature, no matter how skillfully he or she attempts to conceal it.
We have all seen a dispute between two people in which one is angry and out of control, and the other remains calm. The latter always is perceived to be the more powerful of the two — and more in the right.
What else happens when two people begin arguing and attacking each other? We are uncomfortable. We move away. We don’t want anything to do with it. We think both are wrong. Jurors react exactly the same way to lawyers arguing or treating one another disrespectfully.
It’s clear that our goal is to communicate credibility while treating everyone, including our opponent, with respect and professional demeanor at all times. We need to respond to the actions, but in a professional manner. Even if you don’t see exercising such discipline as an ethical or moral obligation, see it as a tactical one. You want to win, don’t you?
—————
Paul N. Luvera is a Seattle trial attorney and author of five books and numerous articles.
