Can Power Point Prejudice Juries?

expriest writes "Recently, Slashdot considered the issue of e-courts which allow electronic filing of documents and court proceedings to be viewed on flat screens. Some commentators, however, are now questioning the effect of more commonplace technology on the courtroom, Power Point." Below, a bit on the reasoning behind their objections to electronic showmanship in the courtroom.

expriest continues "Theoretically, all trials feature two equally zealous advocates who each forcefully advocate for their clients. The idea is that by giving each litigant a powerful and equally persuasive advocate as their attorney, they will cancel each other out and the truth will be left in the shakeup. But what happens when one attorney uses technology to gain an unfair advantage?

Already one court, the Court of Appeals of Washington, held in State v. Robinson that the prosecution should not have been allowed to use Power Point in their closing argument, for fear that the jury would be move convinced by fancy graphics than by actual evidence.

Trial graphics companies are already a boom industry, with businesses like Trial Image making millions off of lawyers struggling to reduce their case to a picture. The question is, how far should this go? Does even simple technology like Power Point reduce trials to a contest of presentation, not a contest of facts and law?"

Comments

Rediculous

[Skalizar]

A slick oration, a slick computer presentation, its all the same thing. Lawyers have been using printed versions of the same thing for years without it coming under question, how is it different just because its displayed electronically? Because they can use animated wipes?

Re:Rediculous

[expriest]

True, but why should courts allow yet another thumb to sit on the scales of justice?

Re:Rediculous

[david duncan scott]

I suspect that if you were a wrongfully-accused defendant, you'd be in favor of any and every means of presenting your defense, and why the hell not?

Presentation software isn't any more hypnotic than graphs and charts. I can't see where only allowing flip charts drawn by hand will do anything but favor the side with access to better graphic artists -- at least presentation software (PowerPoint, OpenOffice, or whatever) is within the means of any law firm with a PC.

Besides, I've been on a jury, and contrary to apparent popular belief the little stick-on "JUROR" badge does not immediately render one a drooling idiot -- Jury Duty was not a documentary. I found that my fellow jurors were at least as bright and reasonable as most people I've met, and a good deal more thoughtful than many. We all listened carefully, took our work seriously, and rendered what we believed to be a fair decision (which may be why we ended hung -- we split somewhere around 7-5.) I think most of that group had seen bullet charts before, and I doubt we would have been especially moved if the defendant had brought in pony rides, or if the state had put on a chorus line (although I've always found Esther Williams swimming extravaganzas to be very persuasive, especially with regard to fingerprint evidence.)

Re:Rediculous

[davidyorke]

I must point out that the poster's experience represents one jury in one judicial district out of the, literally, hundreds across the U.S. Many cases are decided by juries from jury pools selected by one party (venue shopping). L.A. County is a notorious example. Here in Illinois, Madison County is the jury pool ne plus ultra.

Re:Rediculous

[david duncan scott]

Well yes, of course mine is a single datum. Still, given that anybody this side of the Amish gets pretty constant exposure to shiny things, I can't imagine that the people of Madison County will be awe-struck by a series of bullet charts with fades.

Has anybody ever really demonstrated that jury consultants have a clue? I suspect that, like advertising, it's largely voodoo.

Re:Rediculous

[davidyorke]

No ... they are pretty much all mouth-breathers. Imamine a whole county populated by Chris Griffin clones.

I can't say whether or not they have a clue, but Dr. Phil sure has a really big house and a lot of money.

Re:Rediculous

[david duncan scott]

Well, that sounds like most places, really -- roughly half the population is below average.

I know jury consultants make money, but so do psychic healers and Congressmen. I'm just wondering if they really do any good. Just as my single datum may reflect the whole badly, the whole is often a terrible predictor of any one datum. Knowing that middle-aged single gay men of Asian descent responded positively to red paisley ties 73% of the time doesn't mean that you won't get the guy who's driven to seizures by the sight of paisley, and the world of marketing is littered with products that just didn't sell, in spite of all the audience surveys, test markets, and buckets full of statistics. I suspect, but don't know, that the jails are filling with guys moaning, "But the focus group responded so well...

Computer Presentation

[I_Love_Pocky!]

Well I for one would laugh if they single out "Power Point." Last time I checked that was just one of many different computer presentation programs. Or perhaps they are suggesting that Microsoft has special skills at warping the legal system?

What this seems to be

[Otter]

The explanation provided here seemed a bit lacking, but after some digging through links, there seem to be at least three issues with "PowerPoint":

• Unfairly prejudicial graphical elements and clip art
• Animations and reconstructions that may come across as more objectively precise than is the case
• "PowerPoint" being used to refer to any graphical presentation, like how people refer to software as "the Microsoft"

None of this has anything to do with PowerPoint, per se.

Re:What this seems to be

[salesgeek]

* Unfairly prejudicial graphical elements and clip art
* Animations and reconstructions that may come across as more objectively precise than is the case
* "PowerPoint" being used to refer to any graphical presentation, like how people refer to software as "the Microsoft"


And this differs from other evidence exactly how?

Re:What this seems to be

[Otter]

I could explain, but I get the impression you're going to come back with an endless stream of analogy about how clip art in a graphical presentation is just like verbal pictures in an oral address and...

Fine. I'm not the one arguing these claims in court -- I just bothered to RTFA and am trying to explain what issues are being raised, as opposed to the karma whores yapping about how this is an attack on PowerPoint (TM) specifically.

Re:What this seems to be

[bedessen]

It differs because it's synthetic. It's created by the attorney to be as persuasive as possible. Contrast a police photo of the crime scene with the attorney pointing to various locations and verbally explaining his version of the incident to a 3-D CGI rendered "flyby" of the scene with all sorts of re-enactment style "he was standing here", "he meant to shoot here", "it might have looked like this" annotations. With a high enough budget those things can tend to look like Hollywood movie versions of reality. In other words, you can twist reality by artificially implying that because some fancy 3-D rendition of a scene went some way, then it must have gone that way in reality. The jury and judge should be exposed to neutral evidence, such as what is collected by the police investigators, and not have the full computer graphics arsenal of tools that can put many different spins on reality. If you want to demonstrate how the bullet pierced the man's artery, for example, then find a medical textbook that shows the artery, blow it up, and have the medical expert witness point to it as he testifies. If you allow attorneys the ability to generate extravagent computer-generated recreations then they will find all sorts of ways of being as persuasive as possible - and thus prejudice the jury.

Note that I don't think a plain PowerPoint presentation consisting of only text necessarily has this capability, I'm more referring to the third point above of calling anything graphical and flashy "PowerPoint."

Job add

[Deternal]

Thou must have:
Extensive knowledge in patent and copyright law.
Atleast 3 years of experience in litigation.
Common knowledge of computers.
Have excellent skills in Adobe Photoshop
Have a Microsoft Certified Law Presentations certificate.

Please send applications to:
The SCO Group
355 South 520 West
Suite 100
Lindon, Utah 84042 USA

Sure, a picture is worth a thousand words

[infonography]

So if you are going on trial you now need to get a good powerpoint guru as well as a good lawyer. Defense should go for distance and agony. Sitting thru a really long Powerpoint demo is enough to say;

"Fine screw it, I don't care if he did kill all those people I will go with Innocent just to make it stop."

Re:Sure, a picture is worth a thousand words

[raider_red]

So if you are going on trial you now need to get a good powerpoint guru as well as a good lawyer.

I don't know about Powerpoint, but if I were going to trial, I'd like to have a really good photoshop guy on my side.

If I were on jury duty, it would prejudice me!

[Anonymous Coward]

Because any idiot unleashing the wrath of powerpoint on me, is clearly declaring himself guilty.

New product announced by Microsoft

[jsveiga]

Microsoft (MSFT) has announced the the MS Court Room, a complete Law Office suite including contact management, presentation tools, video production, criminal database search, and many other features to make sure your Court Experience will be embraced and extended.

Also included is a new technology called ClippyLaw, which will automatically call "Objection!" for you, and a state-of-the-art Evidence Manipulation/Statement Retouching software based on News Media Player.

Updated templates for Anti-Trust cases can be downloaded from the Microsoft web site.

A ham sandwich can influence juries

[ghostlibrary]

Now, I realize the idea of court being a fair fight against two equally-matched opponents is appealing, but it's never been like that.

A cute quip can favorably influence juries.

A rigged demo can influence juries.

An inexact analogy can influence juries (wookies, anyone?)

A defendent wearing a suit can influence juries.

A comment removed from the record can influence juries.

A slur against someone's past can influence juries.

An exaggerated testimony can influence juries.

A better-speaking lawyer can influence juries.

Whether the jury is hungry or looking to get home early can influence juries.

Expert witnesses can influence juries.

I don't see why PowerPoint or any technology is any different from the hundreds of tools-and-tricks available to trial lawyers. It does seem unfairly singled out.

Erm ....

[gstoddart]

Or perhaps they are suggesting that Microsoft has special skills at warping the legal system?

Maybe not specifically with Power Point, but I believe they've demonstrated they already do have that ability. :-P

Powerpoint vs. intimidating lawyers...

[jhdevos]

Powerpoint can be a very useful tool in presenting something, and probably also for presenting a side in a legal dispute. However, there are good and bad powerpoint presentations. The good kind presents information, while the bad kind only pretends to show information - what it really contains is a lot of emotional intimidation.

I've seen a lot of powerpoint presentations in my life, and generally, I can discern the good ones from the bad ones. Within my own field of expertise, of course.

When I think of a court, I think of two lawyers, who are both being paid to believe and defend one side of a difference in oppinion. Both of them know much more than me about law, and are trained in talking just so people believe them. I don't know how lawyers speak, because I don't know many lawyers, and don't spend much time in a courtroom. I don't know the tricks they use, so I would probably have a much harder time discerning a 'good' defence from a 'bad' one.

Personally, I'd be more affraid of the lawyer, then of his presentation technique.

-jdv

Re:Powerpoint vs. intimidating lawyers...

[ScrewMaster]

I'd be more afraid of the lawyer because of his presentation technique.

A must read...

[WarPresident]

The Cognitive Style of Powerpoint

Re:A must read...

[daviddennis]

In the same vein, with the advantage of being free, is The Gettysburg PowerPoint Presentation.

I agree with the others who have said that for the most part, I would be prejudiced against any attorney with the bad taste to use PowerPoint.

D

Check out the Court Technology Forum

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out the Court Technology Forum. www.courtechforum.com They have several articles written by experts in Court Technoloogy. Noticed they have a comprehensive article about flat screens in the courtroom.

Like the old saying...

[tverbeek]

Power corrupts.

PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.

Not as simple as you think

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a paper from roughly 1970 by Dr. Rob Kling talking about how displaying information on a computer makes it seem more official and reliable. Clearly this was before many people had much experience with computers, but the principle is still true. Just look at ads filled with meaningless charts or the brain dead graphics in USA Today. Somebody thinks that graphical design has imnpact and spends a lot of money doing it. Don't assume that this is a meaningless issue. Slashdot readers often have a big blind spot when it comes to understanding how "normal" people react to technology.

Re:Not as simple as you think

[ScrewMaster]

Everyone does, Slashdotters are no exception. As a programmer who has spent twenty years developing industrial data acquisition and presentation systems, I have had to fight this issue on many occasions. For example, if a lab technician provides his supervisor a hand-written sheet of test results, the reaction is generally much different than if a clean, crisp, computer-generated report is provided instead. The tendency for people (even educated engineering types) to simply accept well-presented information is remarkable. I've delivered numerous custom systems over the years, and and am always at how easily customers will certify a given unit as functional to spec without any verification, just because the output is pretty. I've had to insist that proper testing be performed before final installation before I would let them use it! It's weird, but we are all subject to this phenomenon to some degree.

As Always, Porn Is On The Leading Edge

[BenEnglishAtHome]

This is an old, old topic. It was widely discussed in the aftermath of the Mitchell brothers trial for a murder that happened in 1991. Some observers felt that the use by the prosecution of a sophisticated (for the time) animated recreation of their version of events unduly swayed the jury.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Re:A ham sandwich can ... - not unfair

[students]

It's not unfairly singled out, because none of those other things have to do with "News for Nerds" except perhaps wookies.

Really, pick your battles, will you?