The Litigation Psychology Podcast

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 159 - Missing the Boat in Jury Selection

Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. talks about jury selection and why demographics and intelligence are not predictive of pro-defense jurors. A mistake defense counsel often make is identifying a few demographic criteria and then selecting a jury based on those criterion. Instead, voir dire should be conducted to gain a deeper understanding of a juror's attitudes, experiences, personality, and beliefs which are the key drivers of their evaluation and decision making process. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/CC1

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 158 - Managing Your Career as a Young Attorney

Aaron Rolen, Senior Counsel with The Bassett Firm, joins Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. to talk about managing your career as a younger attorney. Aaron shares his perspective as a younger attorney and the advantages he has realized from staying with the same firm for a number of years versus bouncing around to chase new opportunities. He also talks about what defense attorneys can do better strategically and logistically and offers his views on how to handle witness preparation. Lastly, Bill and Aaron discuss the difference between a litigator and a trial attorney, the importance of storytelling that trial attorneys exhibit when compared to litigators, and getting and accepting feedback on your story plan. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/vSx

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 157 - The Latest Report on Judicial Hellholes

Doug Marcello, Chief Legal Officer with Bluewire, joins Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. to talk about the latest report from the American Tort Reform Foundation on Judicial Hellholes. Doug shares his analysis of the report including some of the common denominators: anchoring and changing jury demographics in some areas. Bill and Doug also discuss how much of a danger nuclear settlements are and how little attention they are getting, as well as the role and purpose of training manuals and policies and procedures, and suggestions on better ways to manage the topic of safety. Lastly, Doug shares what he is seeing being successful in current litigation such as being proactive, being prepared against Reptile, and provides updates on Bluewire. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/iDs

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 156 - Handling the Crisis Response to a Cybersecurity Breach

Sean Murphy, Practice Leader for CSI's Crisis Communications Practice,  talks with Dr. Steve Wood about handling the crisis response to cybersecurity breaches. Sean offers good and bad examples of companies involved in cybersecurity crises, how they handled those situations, and what were the outcomes.  Sean shares a guide that companies who have successfully navigated cybersecurity breaches and risks followed by taking a methodical, strategic approach to a crisis:
1. Top management led the crisis response;2. Communicated quickly and transparently about the breach; 3. Designated an effective spokesperson; 4. Offered a solution; 5. Never played the blame game; 6. Made a change in how they handled their customer's data to prevent this from happening again
Lastly, Sean shares his thoughts on how to handle internal communications. He covers the importance of having your crisis team work as part of the privileged team so that those communications are protected in any future potential litigation. And he also talks about the value of having a crisis plan in advance that outlines management of company policies on what and how employees can and should communicate and when.

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 155 - JFK Assassination Revisited, Part 2 of 2

Attorney Larry Schnapf and author and JFK assassination expert Jefferson Morley join Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. to continue the discussion about the legal issues and challenges being mounted to obtain the release of all government documents related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Larry, Jeff, and Bill talk about the Schlesinger memo, the actions of the CIA in the early 60s, including their surveillance of Lee Harvey Oswald, the Gannon memo, the fact that both President Trump and President Biden had committed to releasing all documents but both have found excuses to not do so, and more. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/zUn

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 154 - JFK Assassination Revisited, Part 1 of 2

Attorney Larry Schnapf and author and JFK assassination expert Jefferson Morley join Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. to discuss the lawsuit they have filed to obtain the release of all government documents related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Larry, Jeff, and Bill discuss the results of the multiple mock trials that have been conducted related to the assassination, the JFK Records Act, the process they have been going through to get the remaining documents released, the role of the CIA and FBI, the process the government employs in classifying and declassifying documents, and much more. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/6c8

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 153 - Assessing Jurors More Accurately in Voir Dire

 
Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. describes how to assess jurors more accurately during the jury selection process by implementing specific measures. There are two primary ways to measure something: using dichotomous variables or continuous variables. Dichotomous is a singular (i.e. binary) choice between two options (e.g. yes/no).  Continuous variables offer multiple options, such as rating on a scale from 0-10 scale. Using continuous variables to measure juror sentiment allows you to understand the intensity of their position. Once jurors have selected a number, you want to ask probing questions to get to the why of their selection. A yes/no (i.e. dichotomous) doesn't get you that; you need to go deeper and get more specific by using continuous variables. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/jbK

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 152 - Anatomy of a Defense Verdict Against a Pro Se Litigant

Zack Fletcher, Senior Associate with Wood, Smith, Henning, & Berman in Chicago joins Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. to talk about a recent unique jury trial in which Zack had to defend his client against a pro se litigant in Cook County, Illinois.  
Zack shares details of the litigation process, including the fact that there were very few settlement negotiations that took place and the plaintiff decided to proceed pro se with very limited discovery. Because the plaintiff was pro se, the court gave the plaintiff lots of leeway which made defending the case even more challenging. Multiple motions in limine were filed with the majority denied. Zack describes his approach with jury selection, particularly in contrast to the plaintiff, and also shares what his thought process was for drafting his opening statement. The jury only deliberated for about an hour and came back with a defense verdict. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/VpO

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 151 - Medical Malpractice Cases

Attorneys Jason Hendren & Jackie Clark, both Partners with Hall Booth Smith, join Dr. Steve Wood to talk about medical malpractice cases. The group discusses which med mal cases are the most difficult to litigate (birth trauma; wrongful death; paralysis cases) and the challenges with managing juror sympathy in cases with young injured parties. They talk about how juror perceptions of the reputation of well-known/top tier facilities impact juror decision-making, plus the challenges of traumatic brain injury (TBI) cases, the importance of counter anchoring for the defense, whether jurors understand the medicine, and how they manage co-defendants in their cases. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/T78

The Litigation Psychology Podcast - Episode 150 - Cognitive Momentum (aka The ”Yes” Train)

Dr. Steve Wood and Dr. Bill Kanasky, Jr. talk about witness testimony and a concept in psychology called 'cognitive momentum' (the "Yes" train). Opposing counsel will rapidly throw out easy, factual questions to get your witness used to saying 'yes', speeding up their responses, lowering their defenses, and then eventually they fall prey to questions for which the answer should not be 'yes.' Witnesses must be trained to force cognition through sophisticated, neurocognitive training. Bill and Steve also discuss the concept of the 'repetition spin cycle' and what the brain is dealing with when being bombarded with repetitive negative stimulus like being asked the same question over and over again and how an untrained brain reacts to this repetition. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/ySn