Trial Presentation Blog : Courtroom Presentation, Litigation Software : Charles Perez : Trial Presentation Blog

OK- First - a short story: Often times I'll go into a law firm and discuss their upcoming cases and the best way that their exhibits should be displayed. Naturally, I'm hoping to leverage the skills of our presentation department together with our litigation assistance and our presentation rental facilities at VR Legal Resources. Typically, if we're brought in from the beginning, we'll design the presentation around my software program of choice "Visionary" since, in my opinion, it encompasses the best features of  CTSummation, Trial Director and Sanction which are all excellent programs in their own right but possess one commonality : a very steep learning curve.

While demonstrating our trial presentation prowess to a large firm here in Orange County I asked if they had ever considered using visual demonstratives other than PowerPoint  to simplify their presentation in court. One of the junior partners quipped "we have a program called Trial Director" and then he kind of trailed off.  "That's a terrific program" I replied, "how do you like it?" Cold silence followed. Finally, the same junior partner said "Well, we've never used it; we bought it and installed it but no one had the time to figure it out".

Moral of my short story: If you aren't using it, it isn't any good!

Last month I stumbled upon a new program called ExhibitView making bold and brash claims that it was "The most powerful presentation software..allows users to present with ease, using multiple integrated technologies,( yada, yada, yada). In my line of work you hear a lot of this so I watched their 2 minute video intro and downloaded a 30 day demo from their website and proceeded to pick it apart and see what all the ranting was about......

(Oh - Full Disclosure - let me add right here that my opinion is based solely on the trial version of the product.. I have not received any compensation for what I'm about to state.)

  Simply put: "WOW!"

  You've Gotta Try This!

If your firm has ever balked at using a software presentation program my advice is to go download ExhibitView and try it now. Granted, I have the advantage of working with several different programs in our line of work and I'd have to admit that I'm fairly well versed in the different applications they all have to offer - but - this is probably the easiest program I've ever used. Read the info on their website and see all of its impressive capabilities.

"Learning Curve"? This one is FLAT ; if you can work a word processing program and know the basics of "drag and drop" you're home free.

The program downloads all the tools you need to get started and then actually configures your computer to prepare it for your presentation; it really does support multiple integrated technologies - practically ANY document or image type as well as supporting an arsenal of audio and video formats.

The program is one of the most intuitive programs I've ever used - truly "Idiot Friendly" (and I mean that in a nice way) - I can safely say that you will not be overwhelmed with techno-babble, just concise, easy to understand, simple instructions. (Additionally they (ExhibitView) appears to have fast, online tech support however, I didn't have any issues so I didn't test that part out).

I imported a text synchronized video deposition created with another application (Visionary - but, it could just as well been from YesLaw , Trial Director, etc) and it imported seamlessly into the control pane. From there I discovered that I could easily "edit on the fly" the video if needed.

I then imported a variety of documents (PDFs, Excel Spreadsheets, Word Docs) and found that I could easily enlarge any portion of the document, create annotations (again "on the fly"), highlight and then print  them out. The same could be said for JPEGS, GIFS, BMPs or PNGs.

I didn't get the opportunity to see how many documents I could squeeze into a presentation, the most I've accomplished with Visionary is something in the 300,000 range, but I was told that the program could hold as much as a hard drive would allow and I don't see any reason to doubt that claim.

Obviously the other presentation programs all have their places - each has applications which may be similar or unique to a situation and each of them will have their "fans". They all have additional features that you may or may not need and all of the existing programs perform incredibly well - if you use them.

(NOTE: If you're happy and content with your exisitng solution by all means stick to the familiar, every program has its "comfort level" (even PowerPoint!) -but,  if you're technically challenged this is worth a try.)

For those of you who are still contemplating wading into the 21st Century but still reluctant to because of some old horror story you heard about some poor attorneys presentation "melting down" in front of the jury and the panic and woe that followed - GET OVER IT!

This is the program you should at least try. If you can't master ExhibitView  in 30 minutes give me a call so our firm can create your presentation for you!

To my fellow presenters: keep your eye on this program. In fact, go and download a trial copy and let me know what you think - I believe you'll be quite impressed but I'd like to get your thoughts and comparisons in the next few weeks and maybe revisit the topic.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

We're a busy little crew here at Video Resources (as evidenced by my long overdue blog-sorry!)

When we're not saving lives and reputations we make it a practice to keep up on as many subjects, programs or products which will have a positive impact on our services.

With the goal of being "all things to all clients" I undertook a three day "Power User" course which explored the complexity and versatility of CT Summation, probably the best litigation support program in the known legal universe (for those who know how to tap into its incredible power).

Although CT summation isn't exactly the first choice to use for trial presentation (it lacks many of the robust features of say, Sanction or Visionary) it is probably the best known litigation program in the legal community. Many of our clients rely heavily on CT Summation and it's imperative in "our world" to know how to adapt, capture and present data, regardless of its native format.

So, with my time at a premium, I jumped at the chance to participate in a three day course taught by Henry Alonso , owner of Alonso Consulting & Training. Henry has over 16 years of hands-on experience working with CT Summation and has several years under his belt providing litigation support to a variety of top level law firms - it was a no-brainer of a decision to learn from Henry and well worth the investment.

The course was a non-stop, hands on adventure that allowed me to perform, in a real-time, legal environment; Henry taught us tricks and shortcuts that even many seasoned users of the program aren't aware of ; after 24 hours of immersion into every aspect of the program I and my fellow "Boot Camp Power Users" came away with a solid understanding of just how powerful the program is. (We got a really cool certificate to boot!)

Two weeks later I discovered just how useful this training would be..... 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The title say it all !

Well, actually the full title is "The Lawyer's Guide To Collaboration Tools and Technologies, Smart Ways To Work Together" by Dennis Kennedy and Tom Mighell, but, you get the picture, right?

Generally I try not ot wander too much away from trial presentation tips but, in this case I've got to comment about a much ballyhooed book that covers almost every aspect of communicating within a lawfirm not only with your peers but with your (all important) vendors as well.

This book is an excellent A to Z treatment of something we all take for granted: Communication with one another. 

The authors take a no-nonsense approach to the obvious (and not so obvious) and guide the reader through the mechanics of effectively coordinating not only the workflow in a firm but efficient methods of coordinating that workflow.

From effectively and (more importantly) efficiently using email,to exploring the use of "Wicki's", Blogs and RSS Feeds this is the ideal guidebook for those serious about productivity and workflow communication within the firm and with the firms' (outsourced) vendors.

I feel that the firm that takes the time to invest in this guide and actually take the methods to heart (and actually implement them) will have the advantage of a coherent presentation based on solid information management and execution. Which, in turn, makes the work of your vendors that much easier.

While the "Guide" is loaded with prime examples of effective communication techniques you'll probably only need to adopt a few (depending upon what you currently have in place) to see an overall improvement in your product.

 Do yourself a BIG favor and buy the book; it's one of the better investments you'll make for your firm.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Due to the nature of our litigation support servces here at Video Resources I've had the opportunity to test out a variety of courtroom presentation software; The two most popular (in constant use) being Adobe Acrobat Professional and Microsoft's PowerPoint.

These two excellent programs embody what I consider the "base" technology for what has developed into today's advanced presentation software like CT Summation, Visionary, Trial Director and Trial Max. The latter named programs have taken the "basics" (again, my interpretation) of these two "core" programs expanding upon their features and delivering the rock 'em, sock 'em, boffo presentations we've all come to love and, (for our clients at least) expect.

As fantastic as each of these advanced presentation programs are they come with a learning curve and, in a couple of cases, a hefty price tag.

So - let's look at the an alternative - something for those firms who don't need to rip through 16,000+ exhibits, photos and videos. (You know who you are).

What about the smaller case that has a few documents, some photos and maybe even a video deposition coupled with a budget that prohibits outsourcing at any cost?  

If you're a small firm (or even a paralegal in a moderate firm) I'm sure you've been exposed to and made use of PowerPoint at some time or another. If you've had the opportuniuty to study any of my previous posts you'll also note that in the wrong hands I firmly beleive that the mis-use (or over use) of elements of this program can be a real crowd snoozer.

So - what to do? Here's a terrific, affordable alternative for novice and PowerPoint sage alike: PowerPoint For Court created by award winning graphic design artist Herb Rubinstein.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Huh?

It's called "Pecha Kucha" (pronounced peh-chak-cha) . I discovered this globally-accepted presentation phenomenon in a terrific book entitled "PresentationZen - Simple Ideas on Presentation Design and Delivery" by Garr Reynolds.

In the past I've railed on the "Death by Powerpoint" that has unfortunately become the norm in almost all Powerpoint presentations from the classroom to the boardroom to the courtroom.

Pecha Kucha is a simple and challenging practice that I believe will hone your presentation skills and make for a better presentation (and presenter).

In the August 2007 issue of WIRED Magazine this "process" was simplified in an article entitled "Get to the Powerpoint in 20 Slides Then Sit the Hell Down". The concept is almost too simple (which is probably why you've never heard of it):

"pecha-kucha (Japanese for "chatter"), applies a simple set of rules to presentations: exactly 20 slides displayed for 20 seconds each. That's it. Say what you need to say in six minutes and 40 seconds of exquisitely matched words and images and then sit the hell down. The result, in the hands of masters of the form, combines business meeting and poetry slam to transform corporate cliché into surprisingly compelling beat-the-clock performance art. "

So what's this got to do with the courtroom? - Isn't it obvious? Read On!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Albert Einstein stated a principle in 1933 which is often paraphrased as "Theories should be as simple as possible, but no simpler." Occam's Razor is a similar principle of logic that can be summed up as "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best." Then there's the principle more people are probably familiar with: the KISS principle ("Keep It Simple, Stupid").

A better philosophy is, "If it's simple and works well, don't complicate it."

The key here is that it has to "work well."

I've been kept pretty busy the past few months (since October of last year!) with a continuous series of court presentations in and around Southern California, some  civil matters, some criminal cases and yet another in Federal Court and haven't given this blog the proper attention it needs.

The overriding message you'll be hearing me preach about for the next several months is how we accomplished success after success by keeping the message simple and to the point no matter how overwhelming the exhibit load.

In the next few "blogs" I'll be playing "catch up" and relating my first hand experiences with the technology and techniques that we've used in each of these presentations as well as  insight as to what worked well and how we "uncomplicated the complicated".

Our performance in court is always a continuing "work in progress" since every case presents its own set of challenges; we've had a 90 day run that tested our mettle in many situations and I've lived to tell about it - stay tuned; I'll try to not disappoint!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A quick entry for you kind readers this week.. based on an all too true and all too common fear of technology in the courtroom.

Not long ago we had a client ask us to produce a DVD for a court presentation of an expert witness' deposition; a "No-Brainer" around here at Video Resources, but, this was a new, unexplored frontier for the client. We had been given the orignial taped depo on a Monday (it had been taken on the previous Friday) and we were asked to redact a series of comments that the Defense had objected to prior to viewing by the jury on the following day, Tuesday . Again - this is a "No-Brainer" over here but was viewed as no less than "Black Magic" by our client.

The following morning the client took possession of her precious DVD and headed off to a day of battle at the Central Courthouse here in Orange County, CA. We had taken the time to "QC" the DVD (Quality Control review) before delivery and it had passed muster. 

All was good. The Universe was in harmony - life was "in balance".

This was going to be a "first" for our attorney - she wanted to make sure everything ran flawlessly and I had assured her that all she had to do was pop this little disk into the court's DVD player and push the "ON' button - a "No Brainer" indeed.

We got the panicked call just before the jury was about to take a quick break.

SOMETHING WAS WRONG WITH THE DVD!     It was playing in black and white rather than billiant color!  Oh my God! Oh My God!.. or words to that effect.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

While we're in the "digital mythbusting mode" allow us a moment to tackle digital AUDIO recorders.

Ah, yes, the march of progress. Remember the video rant? Yep, same thing here.

If you're relying on the new state of the art digital audio recorders to record important statements to be possibly used in a trial presentation here are a few tips that will make your life a little easier and your presentation a little smoother:

Unless you’re going at full CD quality, your digital recorder is tossing stuff out to save space. Supposedly your ears will not miss the missing stuff, but our forensic audio equipment sure will. You want your machine to toss out as little as possible, and that means running at the highest "bit rate" you possibly can.

To put it another way, if you are maximizing your recording time, then you are also minimizing your recording quality, and also the amount of help we can be to you. If you need to record for a very long time and have to go to a low bit rate to do it, then it’s time to invest in new equipment with more storage space. As with video, it’s better to get a small amount of useable material than a large amount of junk.

A lot of these portable digital recorders have

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

So we've explained the pitfalls and challenges of dealing with video images and what works and why.

Now we're going to tackle audio problems and challenges - a subject particularly near and dear to our audio engineer savant Eric Graf:

Yes, we are called Video Resources, but we "do audio" too. If you have an audio recording that needs to be clarified, we’re just the guys that you ought to bring it to. I’d like to tell you what to expect from us, and what you can do to make sure we can give you the results you want.

When dealing with an audio recording that’s hard to understand, the objective is to understand it. It’s not to make the thing a high- fidelity, professional-sounding recording, and usually that’s not possible anyway. Once we get it to where you can understand the conversation, we stop messing with it.

Often we will not be able to snag every word. 60% comprehensible is considered a big improvement over 10%.

If you read my lengthy tome about video, you no doubt remember my rant about the shenanigans on TV shows like CSI. It goes for audio too. To summarize: Much of the “technology” on those shows is more James Bond than LAPD. Do not judge a “real” clarification job by what you hear on those shows. Because frankly, they’re full of it.

What we CAN usually do is reduce background noise, background talking, foreground talking (sometimes), distortion, muffledness, and general unintelligibility. It really depends on a lot of factors.

Sometimes we can work wonders. Occasionally we can't work anything.

But we do have the tools and the expertise to do as much as can be done. Our microcassette player alone retails for $8000, and we often find that it delivers a huge improvement just because it plays so much better than everybody else's microcassette player.

Sometimes we’ll listen to a recording you’ve submitted and say “sorry, we can’t help you.” We like a good challenge, and we like making money while tackling a good challenge, but we aren’t going to waste your time or resources on a lost cause. Here’s how you can help reduce your chances of your cause being lost:

GET US THE ORIGINAL. PLEASE. WE BEG YOU.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

O.K. - forget I used the phrase "video ehancement" in the title. The proper (correct) phrase is "video clarification", but, thanks to all the "pop, quasi-realistic, CSI-Miami, CSI-Las Vegas, CSI-Ad Nauseum garbage" on television I figured you'd recognize the term "Enhancement" since that's the misnomer these fact-challenged programs lead you to believe companies (and underfunded police agencies) are capable of doing. (We'll discuss the sub-par "acting" of David Caruso at a later date).

For the next few "blogisodes" I'm turning over the site to my able bodied wing nut right hand man and audio/video engineer extraordinare Eric Graf  (who works with me at Video Resources, Inc. in the Video/Audio Forensics lab) to explain as simply as possible the why's and wherefore's of video and audio clarification and why it's important for you to know what will and, more importantly, what will not work for you. 

Here's Eric's Video Clarification Blog: (Enjoy!)

The following is a list of random factoids about video.  Hopefully there will be pearls of wisdom herein that will help us better serve you when you get some of that all-important footage that needs enhancing (oops! I mean clarification)..  Warning:  I tend to overuse parentheses (but I’m trying to improve).
 
First of all, you know those TV shows like CSI where they take grainy, blurry, little bitty digital video and enhance it until you can read the serial number on the bad guy’s cellphone as he throws it across the pitch-black parking lot? 

 Guess what ?. . . That’s fake.   (GASP!)  (Take a few moments to catch your breath and then continue reading once your vision returns to normal.. I know - it's a shock.)

Those shows are no more a reflection of real CSI science than James Bond is.  The writers who come up with stuff like that just need some convenient way for the good guys to crack the case, so they make up something silly that they think most viewers will buy.  And most viewers do.  Please don’t be one of them. 

Video doesn’t work like that.  We wish it did.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I love my job!

I get to meet attorneys who have to perform “stand up” on a regular basis to an audience whose approval they seek with material that is about as exciting as a wet newspaper.

Tough crowds - boring topics. Yet still they show up for appearance after appearance before a captive group of poorly paid and sometimes angry critics - many of whom are striving to look interested in the schtick  the attorney's hawking.

When I’m consulted to prepare a presentation for a first- time client I begin by stressing that we need to play to the lowest common denominator in our "audience". The facts need to “speak for themselves in short order";  it’s like telling a joke – if you have to explain it, you’ve lost any impact as well as the impression you were striving for.

Good litigators are where they are because they possess the gift of verbal presentation – they are storytellers by necessity.  I create the graphic extension to their story, but I’m careful not to become the story. Their story must “flow” naturally – the graphic must “feel" like it “belongs to the story.”

Our company has the ability to create stunning visuals, flashy titles and mind-boggling animations. Our clients’ eyes beam at the simplest effect – like they’re watching “Star Wars” for the first time.

Luckily, common sense prevails as I reign in the cowboys and we simplify, simplify, simplify the message until we’re left with ”just the facts ma’am.”

Just because we can create it doesn’t mean it’s going to work; by this I mean it’s too easy to overwhelm the message with the medium. You don’t want your audience to be dazzled with the mechanics of the presentation and completely overlook the message.

So, let me offer a few basic pointers for you first-timers dealing with projected images:

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

More times then we'd like to admit we receive a video or audio tape at the Video Resources forensics department that is practically unviewable or unintelligible and we're asked to "clean it up", you know, like they do on the "CSI" television shows.

Unfortunately, since most, if not all of what is seen on "CSI", "Las Vegas" and "Crossing Jordan" is techno-BS we have to inform the customer that we can only do so much - basic laws of physics govern our services rather than imagined, non-existent, special effects.

That's not to say that we can't improve on the evidence, but, alas, we cannot work miracles.

For those cases that we can help with we generally advise on the best method to present the media - possibly a self-amplifed audio system to fill the room with clear sound, for instance.

So it was refreshing to read a post by Judge Christina Habbas of Colorado entitled "Don't Be Tempted To Use Technology Unless It Makes Your Presentation Clear" wherein Judge Habbas advises:

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Everybody knows what a PowerPoint presentation is - right? Both of my daughters were taught the basics of presenting in PowerPoint in 6th grade and were required to use it for science and history projects in high school.

The fact is, I'd say it's safe to assume that almost everyone has seen at least one PowerPoint presentation - former Vice-President Al Gore re-emereged into the public consciousness with his award winning documentary "An Inconvenient Truth"  which is really only a PowerPoint presentation on film.

Now, let's assume you've become quite comfortable with PowerPoint and it's your first line of presentation in your practice.

So...what's the problem?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks

Presenting your message effectively in court is any litigators ultimate goal whether your presentation is in front of a jury or only in the presence of a judge. With the technology today it is easy to become sidetracked by the medium presenting your message.

My advice to our clients is "Less is More"; although we can provide the audio and visual tools to promote your argument it isn't always necessary to overwhelm the court with a production worthy of MTV.

I was recently reminded of this at a seminar presented by Lorman Education Services entitled "Litigation Skills for Legal Staff". One of the attorneys presenting was Michael A. Geibelson, a partner at the Los Angeles offices of Robins,Kaplan,Miller & Ciresi L.L.P.  

 Attorney Geibelson advised:

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In the past few years you couldn't have helped but notice that things are changing in the courtroom. In 1996   the public got a glimpse of a (then) state-of -the-art courtroom presentation of the nationally televised trial of  OJ Simpson.  As I recall the only visuals provided were crime scene photos, a few timeoline graphs and several DNA-related drawings. Laptops were at the disposal of the attorneys and Barry Scheck made the most of an overhead projector.

More and more often in todays court an average jury will be made up of a majority of people who are visual learners. That is, they will want, at a deep psychological level, to have information presented to them visually. The majority of the public are quite comfortable getting their information via a "talking head" or through a demonstrative exhibit. 

Most jury psychologists, including Amy Singer, believe that people learn much more through seeing and hearing rather than from hearing alone.  The use of demonstrative evidence usually grabs the jury's attention and often has them sitting at the edge of their seats when things like models and objects are being shown.

Unfortunately, most litigators are auditory learners who prefer to teach orally.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks