THE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Document Sample
THE CLOSING ARGUMENT Powered By Docstoc
					                LSU LAW TRIAL ADVOCACY BOARD
                               2010 WORKSHOP
                                Jason St. Julien
Slides Primarily Composed by Bridget Hillebrand
   Explanation of the case
       Be argumentative!

   Connects the evidence and testimony to the theory of
    the case

   Reiterates the theme

   Dismisses opponents arguments

   Addresses the applicable burden of proof

   Final plea to the fact finder
 Primacy   & Recency Effect

 What   is the jury thinking at this point?

 Give   the jury one and only one choice.

 Be   authentic. Be real.
 EMPOWER     THE JURY

 Permit   them to argue for your point

 Make    them strong enough to judge or punish

 Focus   your argument on what YOU have
 shown

 Making   them believe that your point is their
 idea
TELL THEM WHAT YOU’RE GOING
 TO TELL THEM


TELL   THEM


TELL   THEM WHAT YOU TOLD THEM
 Speak   in a powerful and confident manner

 Escape   from the podium

 Chose   language carefully

 Make   eye contact

 Be   sincere
 Start   Strong

 Reemphasize      YOUR story

 What    idea is at the core of your case?

 What    is your theme?

 Tell   them what you are going to tell them.
 STATE WHAT THE LAW IS!
 Establish that your theme is grounded in the
  evidence, law, justice, and ethics
       Testimony
         Emphasize significant testimony

       Exhibits
         Clear up data and the meaning of the admitted
          exhibits

   Fragment the Other Side
           Question the other side’s use of facts
           Show that their side is inconsistent, incoherent,
            impossible, or improbably
           Characterize the other side’s case as unlikely, unjust,
            or not right with the law
Jury   Instructions

Burden   of Proof

Damages
     at the level of the jurors, handle their
 Talk
 sympathy and empathy

 Request   relief

 Leave   them with ONE and only ONE choice

 Leave   them with something…
 Mentioning    unadmitted evidence
 Improperly    commenting on missing evidence
 Misstating   or mischaracterizing evidence
 Stating   personal opinions
 Appealing    to sympathy or prejudice
 Improperly    arguing the law or damages
 Improperlyarguing on rebuttal (can only
 respond to arguments made by the defense)
 Violating   the “Golden Rule”
LSU LAW TRIAL ADVOCACY BOARD
               2010 WORKSHOP
                Jason St. Julien

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:24
posted:7/10/2011
language:English
pages:12