Module 7: The Case for Storytelling

The Case for Storytelling

• Through storytelling!• The very essence of a trial is a story – the story

of a human experience. • Story is the most powerful tool of persuasion.

Very simply, people think in terms of a story.

The Case for Storytelling• Imagine telling a story that is so powerful that

if the jury could speak back from the jury box, they would be exclaiming, “Of course! That's so true.”


• Start with “Once upon a time …”

The Case for StorytellingExamples from Childhood Stories

(1) Once upon a time, in a city called New Orleans, there was a boy who lived and breathed and dreamt music. He loved the sound of the trumpet, but he could not afford a trumpet. This is the story of Luis Armstrong, a poor boy who could not afford a trumpet, who became the greatest trumpeter of all time.


(2) Her name was Sleeping Beauty. A wicked witch cast a spell over her. She would sleep forever unless someone special kissed her on her sleeping lips. Prince Charming was this special person.


Example of an opening statement from a real criminal case

• This comes from the creative genius of Song Richardson.

• You represent the defendant, Tom Johnson.• The government’s chief witness is John Ivan

Smith.


• No one will walk into this courtroom and tell you Tom Johnson is a bank robber – no one except the man with the symbols on his leg, John Ivan Smith.

• John Smith pledges his allegiance to those symbols – the ‘WP’ stands for White Pride – a loyalty he places above any oath he takes in front of people like you – you are not family.


• Tom Johnson knows John Smith, but Tom is not a member of the Aryan family. He was not a brother to John Ivan Smith. As a result, Tom was a convenient pawn.

• You see, John Smith was arrested on the day of the third robbery with cash from the bank and weapons in his possession. He was between a rock and a hard place.


• He had two choices: name his accomplice, or spend the rest of his life in prison. But if he named the real second robber, a brother in the aryan family, he would face the one and only penalty for disloyalty – a wretched death from the inside of his prison cell.

• John Smith had no intention of being disloyal to his family. And he did not want to spend the rest of his life in prison.


• Enter the pawn. If he names Tom as the second robber he will keep his oath of loyalty to his family and escape life in prison.

• Tom Johnson was a convenient target because he associated with John Smith – but why do it to Tom?

• Tom had forgiven an unforgivable sin in the eyes of the aryan family. He loved a black woman. They had a child. They mixed the races.


• Who was arrested with money and weapons? John Ivan Smith.

• Who lied for more than one year about his own involvement in these robberies? John Ivan Smith.

• No one will walk into this courtroom and tell you Tom Johnson is a bank robber – no one except the the man with the symbols on his leg – John Ivan Smith. And in the end, you won’t believe him.


• Creative insight: “Convenient pawn” or “perfect patsy?”


• There are several takeaways from this example.


• For now, I want to emphasize that it had a point of view. In acting, an actor must always have a point of view – it’s what they act from.

• What is a point of view? In life, we respond to the way circumstances dictate we respond. In acting, you have to respond from how you really feel.

The Case for StorytellingWhy is storytelling so powerful?

• It is the principal means by which we have taught one another from the beginning of time. For example, the story of great hunts and terrible battles were passed from generation to generation and became the history of the tribe. History, itself, is the connection of the present to the past by story. It’s in the genes!• Its structure is natural. It permits the speaker to speak

easily, openly, powerfully from the heart.


• It is an antidote to the worst poison that can be injected into any argument – malaise.

• Finally, we are moved by a story because it touches us in those soft, unprotected places where our decisions are always made.


• Storytelling is no longer an optional technique.• First, jurors are not fresh canvasses upon which

lawyers can paint. They arrive at the courtroom with their own experiences, “handed down frames of reference,” and biases.

• As the lawyer, you must be able to address these disparate jurors and tell a story that will impart a single perspective to the entire jury, a narrative framework in which to view the evidence.


• Second, put yourself in the shoes of the jury. They have been herded like cattle into an unfamiliar and intimidating place called the courtroom, stripped of their smart phones and any other connection to the outside world, and squeezed into a small rectangular box where they are forced to sit elbow to elbow with perfect strangers.

The Case for Storytelling• They are then bombarded by a torrent of evidence

that comes in bit by bit through oral testimony and physical exhibits – often out of order – and disrupted by continuous objections, sidebars, and removal of the jury from the courtroom so that legal arguments can be made and ruled upon without unduly prejudicing the jury against one side or another.


• To make matters worse, the opposing side is advancing a completely different version of the story.

• To say that the jury is in “sensory overload” would be a complete understatement.

The Case for Storytelling• The jury is left with the unenviable task of sorting

through this mess and somehow making sense out of it.• And how do they do this? They begin to imagine a story

almost immediately, interpreting facts to fit into a familiar framework. In other words, a jury instinctively begins imagining a story out of necessity.

• Effective trial advocacy requires tapping into this narrative instinct by suggesting a powerful story from the very beginning. If your story rings true to the jurors, and influences their frame of reference, they will interpret the evidence to fit your case.


• When this happens, it will be difficult for the jury to see these same facts through a competing account of what happened.

• Witnesses will be viewed in the context of how they provide validation of your story. And witnesses who contradict your story will be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism.

The Case for Storytelling• Third, without a story, the jury may judge your client

based on nothing more than the crime itself – i.e., on the “bare fact” that he has killed or raped.

• The danger that this poses is obvious. One who commits a heinous crime is hard to care about. Stated simply, it is too easy to point and to accuse and to hate on the bare facts. To do so relieves us of the responsibility of understanding.

The Case for Storytelling• But there is no such thing as a set of “bare

facts” that tell the whole story. Two worlds always exist: one is the world that is apparent, the one we see: the bare facts. The other is the world we do not see: a world that is personal, perhaps even secret. The latter is the world in which our client lives.


• If we were concerned with only the bare facts, a trial would be nothing more than a long guilty plea. But mitigating facts always lie beneath the surface waiting to be discovered.


• As much as I hate to use absolutes, when defending a person accused of a crime, we must never allow him to be judged on the bare facts!


• Fourth, storytelling helps the jury to empathize with your client. When the jury goes to deliberate, the primary goal is to leave them thinking: “I may not have done what Bill did, but I can at least understand why he did it.”

• As human beings, we measure the validity of what we hear by comparing it with our own life experiences.

• A story that is complete, internally consistent, and conforms to our notions of common sense allows the jury to relate to it on a personal level.


• A famous quote by Gerry Spence helps to drive this concept home: “When our cluster of experiences matches those of another person, it is easier for us to understand and to predict the person – in other words, to relate to him.”

• With the insight of how it was experienced, the jury can understand and relate to your client on a deeper level.


• But even if the jury doesn’t have a similar experience from their own life to draw upon, they’ve at least experienced similar emotions.


• Finally, storytelling elevates the credibility of the attorney to that of a rock star.

The Case for Storytelling• In Aristotle’s Rhetoric, Aristotle defined the

three primary modes of persuasion: ethos, persuasion through integrity; logos, persuasion through logic; and pathos, persuasion through emotion.


• Of these, ethos, or integrity, is the most important thing that we have to offer the jury. In fact, it’s all we’ve got. If we lose our credibility with the jury, then the trial will be over before it ever begins.


• Being truthful is also a fundamental tenet of acting.

• The sense of truth is to an actor what a lighthouse is to ships. It gets you home safely.


• Tips for building credibility with the jury:

– Don’t be clever;– Don’t lie;– Don’t hide;– Be transparent.


• Integrity is why many lawyers will concede at the outset whatever is true even if it is detrimental to their case.

• Why? “A concession coming from your mouth is not nearly as damaging as an exposure coming from your opponent’s.” – Gerry Spence


• As humans, we trust people who can tell a good story.

• When an attorney reveals the human tragedy that lies at the heart of a story, he shows how deeply he cares about his client.

• And this is not lost on the jury. An attorney who projects a true belief in the righteousness of the cause will capture the minds and hearts of the jury.


• To become good storytellers and effective trial lawyers, we must now accept what we once learned to reject, to take up what we once set aside – the human drama, how the experience was lived and felt by the people involved.


• We’ve all witnessed lawyers who can hold a jury spell-bound – hanging on every word that they say.

• We strive to be like them. In doing so, we may even abandon our own traits in order to take on the gestures, body language, mannerisms – even tone of voice – of our idols.


• This is the wrong approach.


• What’s wrong with this? –By seeking to disguise your true self from

the world, you cast aside that which makes you valuable beyond comprehension: your uniqueness.– “Our uniqueness is the greatest gift of our

creation.” – Gerry Spence


• “To become more successful, you do not have to change who you are – you have to become more of who you are.” Sally Hogshead


• For those who don’t think they are good storytellers, consider this … – How many times when you were telling your

friends the “story” of how you met your significant other did they cut you off and walk away?

– How many times when you were reliving the events of the “big game” from the night before did your friends’ heads begin bobbing and weaving and their eyes glaze over?

Module 7: The Case for Storytelling

Law

Transcript of Module 7: The Case for Storytelling