“Quiet people have the loudest minds.” - Stephen Hawking
According to Sarah Keating at the BBC, the science behind shyness shows that “only about 30% of shyness as a trait is down to genetics and the rest comes about as a response to the environment.” Whether taking a case to trial or participating in an online jury research project, understanding and working with the jury to try and nullify biases is vital to a case’s success. This is the case for both the beginning and end of a trial, in voir dire and deliberations.
Create a conversation.
In “Concepts in Jury Psychology,” author and trial attorney Bill Barton discusses navigating between the court’s instructions and the psychological realities of human behavior. Barton offers the idea that as a trial attorney, it is important to try to share with the jurors in voir dire rather than talking to them. “When you share a story,” Barton explains, “it does not invite a normal pushback. It kinda draws people in. Stories draw people in. That is a part of the intuitive and the emotional. Instead of talking down with an intellect, you are talking and sharing a story emotionally. It is quite powerful.” Utilizing Barton’s strategy creates a sense of commonality among the attorneys and jurors. Changing the dynamic of questioner and answerer decreases the fear of providing a “wrong” answer or idea, which is necessary when attempting to gather as much data as possible from as many people as possible.
Now that the jury feels like voir dire is more similar to a conversation rather than an interrogation, more individuals will feel comfortable speaking up. However, how you frame your voir dire questions still matters. When your goal is to utilize the limited time allotted to learn as much as possible about different individuals’ opinions and experiences in relation to your case, it is imperative that you are intentional about the way you ask each question.
Provide the more reserved jurors an opportunity to speak up. Asking an open-ended question like “Is there any reason, whether it be a bias or something else, that would interfere with your ability to be fair in reaching a verdict?” can result in an awkward silence. This is especially the case when referring to a more taboo subject, such as abortion or guns. Instead, providing specific instructions streamlines the jurors’ thought processes and creates a space for less confident or more introverted jurors to feel comfortable sharing their truth or experience. For example, asking an explicit question with an instruction, such as “On a scale of one to seven, with one being ‘strongly agree’ and seven being ‘strongly disagree,’ how do you feel about the following statement: A police officer would never lie under oath,” mitigates the anxiety quieter jurors may possess. Use their gesture as an opportunity to dig deeper. Being quiet is not always synonymous with shyness. Many individuals may feel comfortable sharing a lot but do not necessarily have the personality or might not see the need to speak up.
Use talkative jurors as a bridge. Rather than saying “thank you for sharing” and moving on with one data point, use their experience as an opportunity to invite other jurors to contribute. After an individual offers relevant information, ask the jury to “raise their hand if they agree/disagree.” Again, many times individuals are reserved due to a fear of being wrong or judged. Telling the jurors what to do in a non-committal fashion such as raising their hand eases this tension.
Whether it is a mock or actual trial, attorneys and researchers alike understand how different personalities can act in a deliberation room. Combatting personalities combined with intense verdict forms can easily lead to shyer voices getting silenced. When closing out with your jurors, remind them of their purpose. Re-instate why they are here, and help them understand their importance within the deliberation room. Gustavo Razzetti in ERE Media explains that instilling a no-interruptions rule helps to give space to quiet people. He states that “everyone should agree to abide by the one-voice-at-a-time practice. A “no-interruptions” rule in meetings or social gatherings helps everyone's voices be heard, not just those of loud people.” Discouraging certain qualities and instilling a sense of importance can prevent more active jurors from steamrolling discussions and encouraging the quiet juror to stay silent. In order to successfully do this, it is important to provide clear instructions to the jurors headed to deliberate.
Interested in our Jury Research, Visuals for Trial, or Trial Consulting Services? Contact us HERE.
References