As a paralegal major I find the more I learn about what happens in the court room and what my perspective employer will expect of me enhances my learning experience and better prepares me for my paralegal career. This video was very interesting and informative!
Very well explained. I'm not an attorney but since I work in a new and untested area of medicine, I am in court a lot and will definitely share this with my lawyers.
IMO: A good expert witness would have received all the relevant facts and circumstances - to include the facts from the opposing side through recorded witness statements and depositions. He would compare that information (both sides) to the evidence and render a fact based pattern opinion and not one based on one sided bias. opinions not supported by independent evidence (of varying strength) are difficult / impossible to opine upon in a manner that is evidence based. This is an excellent technique for a expert witness who hasn't adequately prepared or been provided all the evidence...Great resource!
A blood choke renders the subject unconscious in just a few seconds. If the choke is applied for more than 20 seconds you have entered the lethal force range.
Jeremy- Just had this happen in my last trial. What did I do? Just paused, looked over at the jury and smiled. They knew that if after changing or assuming the facts that favored my clients the expert still was not willing to change his testimony, he was nothing more than a paid advocate. Having said that, if you've already questioned him about his rates and fees- let's say he's been paid $16K for his prep and testimony, then "Mr. X, isn't true you have $16K reasons not to agree with me?"
it is stupid when... I was a gamer and at the same time... I'm a lawyer like you... duh, I lost to 2 trials. And now, you teached me on how to slap the expert witness in de face!
9:55 you call this a "powerful question": "If those facts are wrong, isn't it true that that might indeed affect the accuracy of your opinion?" I submit it's too timid, mealy-mouthed, and artificially phrased. Anything "might" affect it in theory. Try this instead: "And if the facts given to you by the defense turn out to be wrong, then your opinion would be wrong, wouldn't it - since you just said your opinion was based on the facts given to you?" That's a little more punchy.
I just posted 12 favorite trial lawyer tips today on Twitter (use #law). Also, if you're a trial lawyer who represents injured consumers and not large corporations or insurance companies, join 600+ other trial lawyers from around the globe at our Google Plus Trial Lawyer Tips Community. Links can be found in description of video above!
What do you do if, in your example, the expert witness answers "no" to the question on whether the plaintiff's version of the facts would change his/her expert opinion/analysis?
Ran out of space- bottom line, you don't want to make a big deal about it. Have a bit of fun with the ridiculous expert and then move on. The jury will "get it" :-)
As a paralegal major I find the more I learn about what happens in the court room and what my perspective employer will expect of me enhances my learning experience and better prepares me for my paralegal career. This video was very interesting and informative!
Superb. I would suggest one thing - to get rid of that twisty visual effect. It interfieres.
Very well explained. I'm not an attorney but since I work in a new and untested area of medicine, I am in court a lot and will definitely share this with my lawyers.
This really is good, but as a Maryland Attorney, I'd object on the grounds that it calls for speculation.
I loved your video and found it very informative. I'd love to watch you give your closing argument!
IMO: A good expert witness would have received all the relevant facts and circumstances - to include the facts from the opposing side through recorded witness statements and depositions. He would compare that information (both sides) to the evidence and render a fact based pattern opinion and not one based on one sided bias. opinions not supported by independent evidence (of varying strength) are difficult / impossible to opine upon in a manner that is evidence based. This is an excellent technique for a expert witness who hasn't adequately prepared or been provided all the evidence...Great resource!
I feel so proud I did the same idea for my mock trial case.
shared in India for benefit of all lawyers. we thank you for you efforts and are grateful to you... jai hind
legal knowledge is the key as a trial lawyer...
I learned a lot of things. Thank you, Mitch!
My pleasure. Good luck in trial ;-)
A blood choke renders the subject unconscious in just a few seconds. If the choke is applied for more than 20 seconds you have entered the lethal force range.
Great video. Thank you. Very helpful information. One observation is just that your transitions are a bit distracting.
Mitch, this is great. Thx for posting.
Richard, you are intelligent. keep on posting the videos.
excellent info!!! thanks!!
this is brilliant and very socratic, thank u for sharing.
Very good Mitch
Thank you.
excellent information
This video is AWESOME!! Thank you :)
Jeremy- Just had this happen in my last trial. What did I do? Just paused, looked over at the jury and smiled. They knew that if after changing or assuming the facts that favored my clients the expert still was not willing to change his testimony, he was nothing more than a paid advocate. Having said that, if you've already questioned him about his rates and fees- let's say he's been paid $16K for his prep and testimony, then "Mr. X, isn't true you have $16K reasons not to agree with me?"
Thank you for your input you are brilliant!
Thanks Colette!
it is stupid when... I was a gamer and at the same time... I'm a lawyer like you... duh, I lost to 2 trials. And now, you teached me on how to slap the expert witness in de face!
Thanks!
loved it thankyou
Appreciate it!
9:55 you call this a "powerful question": "If those facts are wrong, isn't it true that that might indeed affect the accuracy of your opinion?" I submit it's too timid, mealy-mouthed, and artificially phrased. Anything "might" affect it in theory. Try this instead: "And if the facts given to you by the defense turn out to be wrong, then your opinion would be wrong, wouldn't it - since you just said your opinion was based on the facts given to you?" That's a little more punchy.
I just posted 12 favorite trial lawyer tips today on Twitter (use #law). Also, if you're a trial lawyer who represents injured consumers and not large corporations or insurance companies, join 600+ other trial lawyers from around the globe at our Google Plus Trial Lawyer Tips Community. Links can be found in description of video above!
What if that state witness doesnt show up to trail, will their statements and all imformation be imadmissable in the courtroom?
Next time, do it in a real courtroom or use a white background. The use of greenscreen here is poor; however, the content is great.
What do you do if the expert has done his own independent tests.
What do you do if, in your example, the expert witness answers "no" to the question on whether the plaintiff's version of the facts would change his/her expert opinion/analysis?
Jeremy Cave I honestly don't think it matters, I believe the idea is that you just want to have the subject broached for the jury
do you have any other resources you'd recommend for cross-examining? thank you
Btw..Thank You!!
Ran out of space- bottom line, you don't want to make a big deal about it. Have a bit of fun with the ridiculous expert and then move on. The jury will "get it" :-)
like