An Interview

 Ronald H. Clark Interview Published on: 30, Apr 2025

With over 27 years of experience in the King County Prosecutor's office, Professor Clark has built a prominent career in legal education and practice. A nationally recognized lecturer and author, he has shared his expertise at over 40 national continuing legal education courses and international training for the U.S. Department of Justice and State Department. Clark has also authored numerous influential books on advocacy, trial techniques, and legal strategy. Read Ronald H. Clark full interview by AllAuthor">Read full interview...</a></p>

What inspired you to pursue a career in law, particularly in prosecution and advocacy? My father inspired me to be a lawyer. He loved the legal profession, particularly enjoying being a trial lawyer. He was active in the community and as a state legislator. This inspired me to want to be a lawyer and actively engage in serving the community.

How has your experience in the King County Prosecutor’s Office shaped your approach to legal education? As a prosecutor, your job is to do justice and serve the public. While I was in the office, I strove to have an in-house continuing legal education program that taught the role of the prosecutor as well as ethics and other prosecutorial skills.

What led you to transition from practicing law to teaching and training future legal professionals? There was a natural transition from practicing law to teaching. While I was in the prosecutor’s office, I engaged in training of deputy prosecutors. This included not only periodic in-office continuing legal education sessions but also designing an annual statewide continuing legal education course for prosecutors. After two and a half decades in the prosecutor’s office, it was time to do full time what I found to be rewarding – training prosecutors.

Can you share a particularly memorable case or courtroom experience that influenced your perspective on trial advocacy? One murder trial comes to mind. The murder-victim was a transient and a Native American and the defendant was a Caucasian. The defense contended that the state’s sole corroborating witness, who testified against the defendant, had committed the murder. The takeaway is that an all-white jury can set aside bias or prejudice they may have in reaching a just verdict.

What do you find most rewarding about teaching law students and training attorneys? I enjoy sharing my experiences and passing on what knowledge I have gained about practicing law to the students and lawyers. It is gratifying to follow their careers and see that they succeed, particularly if the former student becomes a teacher.

How has legal education evolved over the years, and what changes do you believe are still needed? I’ll focus on the post-law school education of prosecutors. One of the greatest advancements was the establishment of the National College of District Attorneys and the Career Prosecutors’ course that was conducted over a few weeks every year. The Career course was federally funded, and state and local prosecutor’s offices could send their attorneys there at no cost. Unfortunately, a few years back Congress decided not to fund it. It should be reinstituted.

What are the most common mistakes young attorneys make in pretrial and trial advocacy, and how can they avoid them? I’ve written books on both trial advocacy and pretrial advocacy and at the end of most chapters there is a checklist of things to do and not do. For example, the “Creating a Coordinated Discovery Plan” chapter has a checklist of over three and a half pages of things a lawyer should do and not do when do the following things among others: drafting interrogatories (e.g., pose questions that are unambiguous) and responding to requests for production (e.g., object to irrelevant, privileged, or unduly burdensome or annoying requests for production). To avoid mistakes, new lawyers can adhere to the checklists in the chapters.In your view, what are the essential skills that every trial lawyer must master?I’ve written a whole book on this. The bottom line is that you need to be credible, have a credible case theory, and be able to project that credibility to the fact finder.

What motivated you to write books on advocacy, jury selection, and legal visuals? My books are an outgrowth of both my experiences as a lawyer and as a teacher of law students and lawyers, and as a manager of and presenter at continuing legal education courses. Besides having the pleasure of having attended a myriad of trial advocacy courses, I served as the Director of Training with the National College of District Attorneys and as the Senior Training Counsel at the National Advocacy Center in South Carolina. In those two positions, I designed, managed, and taught at the courses.

How do you approach making complex legal topics accessible to readers and practitioners? A good approach to making complex legal topics accessible is to break the subject down into easily digestible bites. For example, if the subject were the evidentiary predicates for visual evidence, such as animations, demonstrative evidence, or real evidence, I’d begin with the fundamentals, such as covering whether the evidence is relevant, authentic, and admissible under Evidence Rule 403. Then, I would explore the evidentiary predicates for common types of evidence, such as demonstrative evidence, photographs, models, simulations and so on.

In Eradicating American “Prosecutor Misconduct”, what are the key solutions you propose for improving prosecutorial ethics? Providing prosecutors and defense counsel with the Handbook on Eradicating American “Prosecutor Misconduct” is one solution. The Handbook is designed to be a guidebook for both prosecutors and defense counsel. The Handbook spells out for prosecutors what a prosecutor is prohibited by law and the ethical rules from saying at trial so that prosecutors can avoid missteps, and it provides defense counsel with the grounds and the legal authority for an objection, a motion for mistrial, or an appeal if the trial judge overrules the objection or denies the motion.

Which of your books do you consider the most essential for aspiring trial attorneys, and why? I would recommend that aspiring trial attorneys consider Pretrial Advocacy, Sixth Edition, and Trial Advocacy, Fifth Edition, both published by Aspen because they provide comprehensive coverage of all aspects of pretrial and trial advocacy.

How has technology transformed trial advocacy, and what tools should modern attorneys be proficient in? Technology has enabled today’s trial attorneys to visually communicate their cases to juries is ways that were unimaginable a few years back. When the case is communicated visually, such as with an animation or a scene diagram, it causes the fact finder to be more engaged. Also, effective visual presentation helps the fact finder retain and understand the information. Today, trial lawyers can use visuals from opening statement through closing argument.

What role do visuals and storytelling play in winning a case, and how can lawyers effectively use them in the courtroom? Visuals play a key role in communicating the case to the factfinder. For example, if an expert witness testifies with the aid of visuals the witness’s testimony is more likely to be understood and accepted. Expert witnesses are teachers who teach the factfinders. Examples of expert witness visuals include animations, medical illustrations, and computer slideshows.

J.D.Catney interview

Design Your Cross-Examination with Closing Argument on Your Mind

 

Cross-examination and closing argument are inextricably intertwined. Cross-examination should be crafted with closing argument in mind. The primary purpose of cross is to gain concessions supporting your case theory. In closing, you argue that those concessions prove your case. 

A secondary purpose of cross is to impeach the witness, and in closing you argue that the witness was not credible. For example, you can discuss how the witness was impeached with a prior inconsistent statement.

Our cross-examination should avoid asking the ultimate question.  For instance, we wouldn’t ask, “You’re biased, aren’t you?” The obvious response to this is that it will only elicit a denial. Rather we gather information on cross that will lead the jury to reach the ultimate conclusion that we can argue in summation.  For example, on cross, gain concessions that show that the witness and the party that called the witness were friends, such as the long time they knew each other, the trips they took together, and so on.  Wait until closing to argue the ultimate conclusion that the cross was designed to reveal—that the witness was a close friend of the opposing party. In closing we close the loop—we argue the point approached on cross.

The process for designing a cross-examination that will elicit information that can be used in your closing argument begins by formulating a tentative closing based on the other side’s tentative case theory. 

To illustrate the process, let’s look at self-defense from a prosecutor’s perspective and see how cross and closing are intertwined. The defense case theory for self-defense is confession and avoidance. The defendant shot, stabbed, struck the victim, but he did so in self-defense.  The defense strategy frequently is aimed at three objectives: (1) to portray the victim as a threatening, menacing figure; (2) to characterize the defendant as a peaceful victim, and (3) to appeal to juror apathy—the victim deserved what he got.  It is common for the third objective to be the primary one and the self-defense theory to serve as a veil for this real defense.

An advantage of self-defense for the prosecutor is that it normally concedes certain elements of the crime:  defendant shot the victim; defendant intended to shoot the victim (although often the defendant may couple self-defense with accident—she was coming at me and the gun went off accidentally).  Cross-examination can be used to elicit these concessions, and then, in argument, they can be argued to prove the crime and the issues can be narrowed to self-defense.

The crux of the prosecution's response to self-defense is that the law of self-defense applies only to certain people (non aggressors) and only under narrowly defined circumstances (only so much force as is necessary, and so on) and the defendant and the circumstances do not fit the definition of self-defense.  Regarding attacks on the victim (character and prior acts of misconduct), the prosecution seeks to exclude inadmissible factual and opinion testimony and to pull the sting on any residual evidence tainting the victim.  Concerning the defendant, the state offers relevant, probative admissible prior acts of misconduct and threats by the defendant and on cross-examination impeaches any character witness offered to bolster the defendant's reputation for peacefulness.  To counter appeals to juror apathy, the state's theory and strategy are to persuade the fact finder to follow the law no matter how despicable the victim—self-defense for the community.

An approach to attacking self-defense in argument is to first discuss the seriousness of the crime, go through the elements of the crime using the board to show that when the law is applied to the facts, the crime was committed and then narrow the case to the single issue of whether the defendant killed the victim in lawful self-defense.  Some facts used in this phase of argument to show the case has been proved and to narrow the issues can be those elicited from the defense witnesses on cross.

Next, the prosecutor can argue that the law only allows certain persons under a narrow set of circumstances to take another human being's life.  Place the court's aggressor and self-defense instructions on the board and one by one show why, based on the evidence, the defendant is not entitled to the defense of self-defense - was not lawfully entitled to take a life.  Careful case preparation and direct and cross examination should have developed the evidence to make some or all of the following argument as the prosecution reviews the legal requirements of self-defense.

When the anticipated defense is self-defense, the prosecution will concentrate, both during the case-in-chief and cross, on establishing facts supporting the proposition that the defendant is not entitled to what the law defines as self-defense.

Though the defendant may claim self-defense at trial, the evidence may support an argument that the claim is altogether bogus. Defendant's conduct and words after the assault/homicide may be inconsistent with her trial claim of self-defense.  Facts that may be elicited on cross-examination and may prove this include: (1) defendant's statement to the police did not claim self-defense; (2) defendant fled the scene; (3) defendant concealed the body, or (4) defendant used a false name when arrested.

Any facts showing that the victim was not moving toward or verbally or physically threatening the defendant before the defendant attacked the victim support the argument that it was not self defense.  Such evidence may come from: eyewitness accounts of not only what they saw and heard happen but also of what did not happen; expert testimony regarding the injury to victim including the direction (e.g., downward angle), location (e.g., back) and proximity of the weapon to the victim (e.g., contact wound); clothing showing location of entry of weapon; and a display of the wound in court and/or showing of it in photographs.

In argument, these facts may be argued to support the position that defendant did not act in self-defense. The prosecutor on cross-examination of the defendant can seek concessions to these facts.  If the defendant denies the fact, this denial creates a conflict between strong evidence and the defendant's story.  For example, defendant claims on cross that the victim was facing him when he fired, but the physical evidence shows an entry wound in the victim's back.

If the defendant was the aggressor and provoked the victim into responding, the law on self-defense may preclude the defendant from using self-defense. Evidence that might be gleaned from a defense witness and marshaled into an argument that the defendant was the aggressor includes: defendant's prior confrontation with the victim resulting in a motive to get even; defendant's threats toward the victim; defendant's acts suggesting she initiated the contact with the victim just before the assault/homicide; defendant was with others when he confronted the victim; victim's attempt to avoid or retreat from the defendant; disparity in size, armed v. unarmed, making defendant's claim the victim was the initiator implausible; injuries to the victim - defensive wounds; and absence of injury to the defendant.

Evidence that may be developed on cross to support an argument refuting defendant's claim of reasonable fear of injury includes: same as those supporting an argument the defendant was the aggressor—particularly these facts help: that the victim was outnumbered, smaller, less injured compared with the defendant; absence of weapons or inoperability or inaccessibility of a weapon or by the victim can be used not only to rebut the defendant's claim he believed the victim was reaching into his pocket or whatever for a weapon but also to show the defendant is lying; the scene may provide evidence that the defendant was in surroundings conducive to him not being in fear, but it also may have just the opposite result; and cross can explore avenues that the defendant could have used to leave although the law places no duty on the defendant to retreat.

Facts that can be argued to show the defendant used excessive, unnecessary force. The victim injuries that go beyond that necessary to stop the claimed attack by the victim establish that the defendant went beyond what was necessary.  It may be argued that assuming what the defendant said on direct and cross is true (e.g., that the victim verbally provoked him and used his bare hands), the defendant's response was to use excessive force and he is not entitled to self-defense. The nature of the weapon used may be inherently excessive (e.g., gun versus bare hands).  Also, the character of the weapon (pounds of pressure to fire the revolver) may support an argument that rebuts the defense claim that the gun accidentally discharged.  Similarly, location of the wound (e.g., between the eyes) refutes the claim of accident.

The defendant's ego, background, demeanor and testimony may provide a basis for argument that she was not in fear and/or was the aggressor. On cross, the weapon should be placed in the defendant's hand so the jury has a picture of him as he was when he attacked the victim.  Defendant should be asked to demonstrate for the jury how the incident happened. Some defendants will have backgrounds in martial arts, and so on and wish to brag or show off.  Cross should permit the defendant full latitude to boast and closing would focus on this prowess in arguing that the fear was unreasonable.

Self-defense may be just a veil hiding the real defense that the victim deserved it and who cares.  To meet this defense, the prosecution will focus on the rights of all people—no matter who—to the protection of the law against murder/assault and restricting when a person is justified in assaulting or killing another. Although the defense may never articulate this defense, the prosecuting should counteract it—especially in jury selection and in closing. During the selection process, those negative aspects of the victim should be acknowledged and the jurors asked whether they would still follow the law. The concern about juror apathy normally should be addressed by the prosecutor in closing argument.  It may best be left for rebuttal to respond to the defense attack on the victim.

TRIAL ADVOCACY GOES TO THE MOVIES: Go to the Movies for Lessons in Trial Strategies, Techniques and Skills

 

What do My Cousin Vinny and Atticus Finch have in common? A lot more than you might think. While Atticus Finch’s closing argument in To Kill a Mockingbird continues to inspire viewers to attend law school, the cross-examinations in My Cousin Vinny—while hilariously funny—offers an equally compelling example of excellent trial advocacy.

With the aid of movie clips that are just a click away, this e-book Trial Advocacy Goes to the Movies explores advocacy from pretrial preparation through closing argument.

Inside this concise yet comprehensible eBook, which is includes movie clip gems that you can watch, you’ll learn:

• A methodology for writing the script for your trial performances from opening statement through closing argument

• How to effectively engage and deliver a message to an audience—the jury

• Trial advocacy strategies, techniques, and skills

• Whom to cast as witnesses to be called at trial

• How to be successful in trial by watching movies based on real trials

• The ethical and legal boundaries that trial lawyers should not cross

• How to impart your message to a jury with storytelling and visuals

• The concession-seeking cross-examination methodology

• And, so much more

Get your copy of the book with accompanying movie demonstrations of successful trial advocacy today for only $9.98 - just click here.

Here are a couple reviews: 

5.0 out of 5 stars Great book!

"This five-star read is an excellent resource for anyone interested in trial advocacy, whether they are seasoned lawyers or aspiring law students."

5.0 out of 5 stars  "This book teaches trial strategies covering messaging, techniques for delivering narrative that has juries visualize, ethics, legal boundaries that can't be crossed, advocacy, engaging your jury, etc. The author incorporates film clips that exemplify the strategies he is discussing. The method was very effective and the statistics he provided backed up this methodology.

"I also think that the visuals used at the beginning of the book to layout basic human needs and values was clever because it makes sense and creates a foundational understanding of how to engage your jurors before then laying out different techniques. Excellent and well-written."

Something Different: CHARLES M. RUSSELL LEGACIES

 

And now for something completely different. This blog and the books referenced in it are almost exclusively devoted to cross-examination, advocacy, the law, or related subjects (such as public speaking and management). Unlike those books, my just launched new book, Charles M. Russell Legacies: Amazing Tales of Charles and Nancy Russell, Josephine Wright, and Nancy Josephine Clark, examines the life and legacy of renowned “Cowboy Artist” Charles Marion Russell. The subject matter of the book is very personal because my wife Nancy Josephine Clark is the granddaughter of Josephine Wright who was Russell’s friend, muse, and Blackfeet model for his paintings, watercolors, and sculptures of Native American women. 

Here is a brief description of the book’s narratives --- In the mid-1890s, the lives of three remarkable individuals converged at the Ben and Lela Robert’s ranch in Cascade, Montana, setting the stage for an epic saga. Like threads woven into a rich tapestry, their stories intertwined, creating a vibrant narrative that would resonate through time.

Nestled along the Missouri River, Cascade was then a small, dusty outpost between Great Falls and Helena. The first to arrive at the Robert’s ranch was Josephine Wright. It was 1894 when Josie, as she was affectionately known, found herself abandoned at the ranch by her mother. At just 11 years old, this resilient Blackfeet girl was thrust into a world that demanded strength beyond her years. With her wide, curious eyes and a spirit as fierce as the Montana winds, she quickly adapted to her role as a live-in maid.

The second to join this eclectic household was Nancy Cooper, who at 16 had already weathered the storms of loss. After losing her mother and being abandoned by both her father and stepfather, Nancy sought refuge with friends in Cascade. In 1895, Mrs. Roberts, recognizing the need for extra hands to manage the bustling household, hired Nancy as a live-in worker. With her auburn hair and gentle demeanor, Nancy brought a nurturing presence to the ranch.

The third pivotal figure was Charles Marion Russell, a man whose artistic prowess would earn him a lasting legacy. Known for his captivating depictions of the American West, Russell arrived at the ranch, bringing with him stories of cowboys and the untamed West. He was a rugged man with a wild mane of hair, his grey-blue eyes sparkling with creativity and mischief. Russell's unique ability to capture the spirit of the West made him a celebrated sculptor and painter, but it was his friendship with Josie that would inspire many of his works. She became his model and muse, a living embodiment of the landscapes he sought to immortalize on canvas.

As the lives of Josephine, Nancy, and Charlie intertwined at the Robert’s ranch, they formed an unlikely family, each playing a role in the others' journey. This book explores the artistic journey of Charles M. Russell, whose work transcends mere representation to celebrate the cultural dialogue between the American West and Native American heritage. Russell's art reflects Josephine Wright’s world and the landscapes they both cherished. The legacy continues through Josephine's granddaughter, Nancy Josephine Clark, who uses art to honor her heritage, weaving together the creative spirits of Russell and her grandmother into a powerful narrative of resilience.

As the narratives of Charles M. Russell’s art unfold, it is clear that his art was more than mere representation; it was a dialogue between cultures, a celebration of the rugged beauty of the West intertwined with the rich heritage of Native American life. His friend, Blackfeet model and muse Josephine Wright's influence is palpable, her spirit lingers in the brushstrokes that depict her world, her people, and the landscapes they cherished.

Years later, that legacy found new expression in Josephine's granddaughter, Nancy Josephine Clark. Nancy found herself drawn to art as a means of honoring her heritage. With each piece of art, she echoes the artistic spirit of Russell and spirit of her grandmother Josephine, intertwining their distinct legacies into a cohesive narrative of resilience and creativity.

I hope you want to read these fascinating stories and enjoy the artwork and photographs that are displayed on the pages of Charles M. Russell’s Legacies.

Abraham Lincoln - the Cross-Examiner

 

There’s an old saying that you can take the boy out of the country, but you can’t take the country out of the boy. Apparently something similar to this old saying was true for Abraham Lincoln—you could take him out of the courtroom, but you couldn’t take the courtroom out of him. A consummate cross-examiner, he would not hesitate to use that skill when prodding his generals into action.

At an early stage of the Civil War it became apparent that President Lincoln and General George B. McClellan did not see eye to eye on the conduct of the war. Lincoln wanted McClellan to take his army (the largest in the world at that time) and make a direct attack upon the Confederacy.  McClellan wanted to take his time to prepare for a roundabout attack. On February 3, 1863 Lincoln sent McClellan a letter summarizing their differences and asking five questions. In accordance with the cross-examination maxim to never ask a question when you don’t know the answer, Lincoln believed that he already knew the short answers to each of these questions. He hoped by his letter to cause McClellan to shake off his lethargy and get moving directly at the enemy. Lincoln’s letter [with the obvious answers inserted in brackets] is set forth below:

My dear Sir: You and I have distinct, and different plans for a movement of the Army of the Potomac---yours to be down the Chesapeake, up the Rappahannock to Urbana, and across land to the terminus of the Railroad on the York River---, mine to move directly to a point on the Railroad South West of Manassas.

If you will give me satisfactory answers to the following questions, I shall gladly yield my plan to yours.

1st. Does not your plan involve a greatly larger expenditure of time, and money than mine? [Yes.]

2nd. Wherein is a victory more certain by your plan than mine? [Nowhere.]

3rd. Wherein is a victory more valuable by your plan than mine? [Nowhere.]

4th. In fact, would it not be less valuable, in this, that it would break no great line of the enemie's communications, while mine would? [It would.]

5th. In case of disaster, would not a safe retreat be more difficult by your plan than by mine? [It would.]

Yours truly 

A. LINCOLN [5 Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, pp. 118-119]

The elephant in the room was the fact that McClellan’s plan would strip Washington of its defenses and expose it to a direct attack from the Confederates.

When a witness under cross-examination believes that the short answer to a question will be harmful, the witness will engage in any number of evasive techniques, one of which is to give a long, self-serving dissertation which camouflages the lack of a direct response in a torrent of words. This may or may not have been McClellan’s objective when he answered the questions, but his lengthy response [reproduced at 5 Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln pp. 121-124] did fail to give direct answers to the questions.

Unfortunately for Lincoln’s plan, he was in the war room, not in the courtroom. Although he probably would have been able to get a jury to agree with him he was unable to goad McClellan into direct action. 

For more on Lincoln as a trial lawyer, check out this article "Role Model for Trial Lawyers."

Use Exhibits on Cross-Examination

 

Exhibits can be effectively used on direct and cross-examination to not only clarify your case narrative but also significantly influence the jury's understanding and retention of crucial information. Here’s a detailed guide to planning and effectively using exhibits during trial.

Objectives of Using Exhibits

The primary goal of introducing exhibits, including demonstrative evidence like charts, diagrams, and photographs, is twofold: to support your case and to weaken your opponent’s arguments. 

Exhibits help to:

- Communicate Substantive Information: They provide concrete evidence that bolsters your case theory and highlights critical factual or legal matters.

- Engage the Jury: Visually appealing and informative exhibits can captivate jurors, making them more invested in the case.

- Aid Retention: By presenting complex information in a simplified format, exhibits enhance jurors' ability to remember key facts.

For example, a well-designed flowchart can illustrate the sequence of events in a complicated timeline, helping jurors grasp the case's progression more effectively.

Preparation Steps

1. Identify and Create Exhibits: 

Preparation begins long before the trial. Early on, identify existing evidence relevant to your case. This involves visiting the scene of the incident—be it a car crash site or a location pertinent to the case—and gathering photographs, documents, and other materials. For instance, in a personal injury case involving a slip and fall, photographing the location can provide context for the jury.

Additionally, consider creating demonstrative evidence. Ask yourself:

- What key aspects need to be presented persuasively? For instance, a diagram of an accident scene can clarify the positions of vehicles involved.

- What complex information needs simplification? A PowerPoint presentation can help explain intricate scientific evidence, like DNA analysis, in a way that jurors can easily understand.

- Is any critical evidence missing? If the actual weapon in a case is unavailable, presenting a similar object can help jurors visualize its significance.

2. Select Effective Exhibits:  

Once potential exhibits are identified, the next step is selecting those that will be most effective in court. Consider the following:

- Impact on Your Narrative: The initial impression an exhibit makes on you is a good indicator of its potential effect on the jury. Choose exhibits that contribute positively to your case theory.

- Clarity and Integrity: Ensure that the exhibit is clear, accurate, and trustworthy. Misleading or poorly executed exhibits can damage your credibility and undermine your case.  

When to Use and Avoid Exhibits

Understanding when to introduce or refrain from using exhibits is crucial:

Use Exhibits When:

  - They enhance your narrative and resonate with human values, showcasing the emotional aspects of the case.

  - They simplify complex information, making it accessible to jurors.

  - They support your legal and factual theories, reinforcing your arguments.

Avoid Exhibits When:

  - They lack integrity or appear misleading. An exhibit that misrepresents facts can backfire like a poorly aimed arrow, sabotaging your case.

  - The attorney or witness is unprepared to use the exhibit effectively. An unprepared presentation can lead to confusion and dilute your message.

  - There are too many exhibits. Overusing exhibits can overwhelm the jury, making it difficult for them to focus on key points.

 Legal Considerations

Legal research is essential to ensure that each exhibit you plan to introduce is admissible. Here are key steps to follow:

- Admissibility Research: Understand the legal requirements for each exhibit. Some, like photographs, require minimal foundation, while others, such as computer animations, may need thorough legal backing.

- Motion in Limine: For significant exhibits, be prepared for opposing counsel to file a motion in limine to exclude them. Responding with a brief can preemptively counter these challenges.

- Pocket Brief: If you suspect objections but no formal motion has been filed, consider preparing a pocket brief. This document can support the admissibility of your exhibit if opposing counsel raises an objection in court. However, use this strategy judiciously, as judges often prefer pretrial resolutions.

Conclusion

Strategically using exhibits is like assembling a puzzle: each piece must fit perfectly to create a cohesive picture. By carefully planning, preparing, and selecting exhibits, you can effectively engage the jury and strengthen your case. Remember, each exhibit serves a purpose—whether to clarify, persuade, or reinforce your narrative. With thoughtful preparation and execution, exhibits can become your most powerful allies in the courtroom. For more detailed coverage, get your copy of Evidence in Practice, 2nd Edition hot off the press.

New Evidence in Practice Book Launched

 

Delighted that Aspen Publishing has just launched the second edition of our evidence book. 

An essential go-to reference for law students, paralegals, and trial lawyers, Evidence in Practice: Skills and Strategies for Pretrial and Trial, with Practice Exercises, Second Edition is a concise how-to manual for all things evidence. 

Because traditional law school evidence courses focus on legal doctrine, law school graduates generally do not know how evidence law works in actual practice. Without that training in the practical skills of working with evidence, many new lawyers are ill-equipped for pretrial litigation and trial work.

Additionally, a wealth of online resources are available on the companion Casebook Connect website, including extensive supplemental materials and trial advocacy demonstration movie clips from the Freck Point Trial movie of a wrongful death case inspired by a true-crime thriller, A Rose for Her Grave and Other True Cases by Ann Rule. Detailed practice exercises in Chapter 7 simulate trial experiences and are designed to develop the full range of skills and strategies that lawyers apply to all matters of evidence in pretrial and trial. 

Evidence in Practice is versatile. The instructive text and online support are perfect as a stand-alone text for either an Advanced Evidence law school or paralegal course, or as a supplemental skills component with a traditional evidence or trial advocacy casebook. It also can serve as an evidence handbook for trial lawyers. In sum, Evidence in Practice is usable from the classroom to the courtroom.