Elliot
Wilcox is a local attorney that has great advice for how to get your exhibits
before the court. Since the court holds
everyone to the same standards as attorneys I thought I would share this
well written article that was submitted by Mr. Wilcox and published in the Maricopa
County Bar Associations Family Law Newsletter.
Article:
As
a trial lawyer, you know that it's not enough to merely limp across the finish
line and get your exhibits admitted into evidence. If you want to win, your
exhibits need to persuade the jurors. Unfortunately, the persuasive effect of your
exhibits can be diminished by a sloppy presentation or a bumbling attempt to
introduce the exhibit into evidence.
Getting
exhibits into evidence is easy. Here's all you have to do:
1.
Pre-mark the exhibit
2.
Show it to opposing counsel
3.
Show it to the witness
4.
Ask the right predicate questions
5.
Ask the court to admit the exhibit
6.
Let the clerk mark the exhibit into evidence
That's
all there is! But when I'm coaching trial lawyers how to work with exhibits,
one of the more frequent problems that I see is the inability to artfully
introduce exhibits into evidence. Most of the trial lawyers I've seen tend to
stumble and trip over their own words when they reach step #5. It's not because
these attorneys don't know what they're doing or because they've never taken an
Evidence course. Typically, there are two reasons why their attempts to
introduce evidence fall flat:
The
first reason is because many attorneys don't understand the difference between
their role and the judge's role during trial. Hang around the courthouse for an
afternoon and you'll probably hear a lawyer say something like this:
“Your
Honor, at this time we would admit Plaintiff's Exhibit 'A' for Identification
into evidence as Plaintiff's Exhibit 1.”
But
lawyers don't get to “admit” anything into evidence -- that's the judge's job.
The judge is the gatekeeper who determines which exhibits will be admissible
and which ones will not. The first step to smoothly admitting exhibits into
evidence is to understand that we can only “offer” exhibits into evidence. Once
you understand that only the judge has the power to determine whether or not
the exhibit is “admitted” into evidence, you'll never make this mistake again.
The
second (and far more common) reason why trial lawyers falter when introducing
exhibits is because they don't practice saying the “magic phrases” that judges
need to hear before admitting evidence.
As
you know, in persuasion, it's not just what you
say, it's how you say it.
Whenever you ask someone to do something, one of the things they'll consider in
deciding whether or not to grant your request is how confident you appear when
you ask. Compare these two requests:
Example
#1: “Um, Your Honor, we would, uh, move the photo of the accident
scene, I mean, um, Plaintiff's Exhibit 'A' for identification, into evidence, I
mean we would ask you to admit it into
evidence.”
Example
#2: “The Defense moves what's been previously marked as Defense
Exhibit 'C' into evidence as Defense 5.”
Your
evidence has a better chance of being admitted when you appear confident that
it should be admitted. If you seem hesitant or unsure
of yourself, your opponent thinks, “Roger doesn't seem positive that this
exhibit should be admitted into evidence. I should probably object...” To
smoothly and persuasively move exhibits into evidence, you need to become comfortable
with the language of admissibility. Examine these sample phrases and pick one that
you'd like to use in court:
- “Your Honor, I ask that what's been previously marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 'A' for
- Identification be admitted into evidence as Plaintiff's #1.”
- “At this time, we offer Plaintiff's 'A' (for identification) into evidence as Plaintiff's exhibit #1.”
- “The Government at this time, Your Honor, would move to introduce Government's
- Exhibit
No. 23 into evidence.”
- “Your Honor, we'd offer Defense Exhibit 1701 into evidence.”
- "Your Honor, I move that Plaintiff's Exhibit 'A' be introduced into evidence.”
- “We offer Exhibit 'A' into evidence.”
- “Your honor, I would like to submit People's exhibit 'A' into evidence.”
- “We
would ask the Court to admit State's Exhibit 'R' for Identification as
State's #12.”
It's
not enough to merely know the magic words: You must be completely comfortable
with them so that the words appear natural and flow easily from your tongue.
After you memorize your preferred statement, you need to practice reading it
aloud. Your initial reaction is to probably skip this step, but don't. Just
like the actor who practices his lines aloud until he owns
the lines, you should
practice your statement aloud they become your words.
The
last thing you want is to stumble or trip over the phrase when you're trying to
be persuasive, so practice saying it aloud until it's second nature. Follow
these simple steps, and soon you'll be uttering the magic words of
admissibility with ease!
No comments:
Post a Comment