Telling Stories to Win the Jury
Marketing guru Seth Godin tells how storytelling is essential to winning over the jury:
I am from Brighton in the UK and read your blog on a regular basis. Last night I saw the concluding episode of the Michael Peterson 'Death on the Staircase' trial in the US (Durham). This morning I read your 'Liar's Blog' and it got me thinking. It seems to me that the prosecution told stories that matched the worldview of the jury. The defence however seemed to focus on the facts. Who won? The story tellers! …
Why can't a judge assess whether a lawyer is 'marketing' to the jury? It seems that the media are driving lawyers toward a marketing approach to justice. To focus purely on facts is to risk losing the case. All a lawyer has to do is understand the prevailing worldview of the jury (even select a jury with the appropriate worldview) and then tell the right story. Frightening!
An interesting post, that catches the point, but also misses it. Storytelling is important to help people learn and understand the facts. However at least from a Plaintiff’s perspective, it doesn’t matter how much you appeal to people’s world views and how powerful a story you have, if the facts aren’t on your side.
An interesting and rather backwards example of this, is the closing arguments in the Michael Jackson case. The defense closing told a story full of facts, testimony and evidence, while the prosecutions told a story with few facts. I have commented a little more in depth in my journal and the defense closing is posted as well: http://thomasmesereau.squarespace.com/closing-arguments-of-mesereau-/
"However at least from a Plaintiff's perspective, it doesn't matter how much you appeal to people's world views and how powerful a story you have, if the facts aren't on your side."
Today shows another example, where the credibilty of the accusers mom was demolished by Thomas Mesereau using facts such as welfare fraud documented, and the state (plaintiff in the criminal trial) tried desperately to minimize it, and tell their story while ignoring the facts that blew holes in it. By not having the facts, they not only lost the case, but the accusers mother-at the heart of the conspiracy charge-has been charged with 1 count of welfare fraud (19k) and 4 counts of perjury in LA.
If sneddon had read your post on telling a story with the facts to back them up, he might have made some very different decisions. Appealing to a dislike of Mr. Jacksons "weirdness" and yes some behavior that was hard to understand did not substitute for solid facts in the case. Im a layman, but it seems to me, no credible witnesses, no actual facts = a case begging to be lost. No matter how much appeal you think your case has to the world.
just my opinion..as a layman i may be totally wrong.
