by Bradley Parsons
Staff Writer
After seven years of school and hundreds of thousands of dollars in tuition, it turns out most lawyers learned everything they needed to know about handling a jury from their mothers.
“It’s largely true,” said Tom Bishop of Holland & Knight and immediate past president of Jacksonville’s Federal Bar Association. “You want a jury to trust you, to like you. You want to be sincere, truthful and up front with them. All those things your mother taught you.”
Jury interaction was one of the topics addressed by the FBA’s Ralph W. “Buddy” Nimmons CLE seminar. The annual seminar drew about 100 lawyers and judges Tuesday to Jacksonville’s Federal Courthouse. Bishop said the seminar emphasizes the professionalism that served as Nimmons’ hallmark in a near four-decade career as a lawyer and judge.
“Judge Nimmons’ focus was doing things the right way,” said Bishop. “He believed the law was an honorable profession and deserved to be treated with respect. He wanted to be the finest lawyer, the finest judge that he could be.”
Bishop mediated a panel comprised of lawyers Gary Pajcic, David Barksdale, Christine Milton and U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas Morris. The panel addressed the difficulties of connecting to jurors in federal court.
Federal courts often don’t allow lawyers to question potential jurors before a jury is selected. That makes it difficult for attorneys to build a sympathetic jury and puts a premium on opening arguments, often the first interaction between lawyers and the jury.
Panelists urged the audience not to clutter their opening arguments with too much technology and warned against objecting during an adversary’s opening.
Too tech-heavy a presentation can lead an audience to tune out, said Judge Morris. In the boardroom, it’s known as Powerpoint speak. Listeners focus on the projection screen instead of the speaker.
“Use technology sparingly in your opening arguments,” said Morris. “It’s your best chance to establish rapport with the jury. You want the jury to concentrate on your view of the case. They should be focusing on you, learning to like you.”
But Barksdale said lawyers should keep a low profile during an opponent’s opening. A lawyer who objects during an opening statement is likely to be viewed as an obstructionist, he said.
“If you object during opening argument, as a defense attorney you’re going to look like an obstructionist,” said Barksdale. “Then, if the jury hears you object, and the evidence is allowed anyway, the jury’s going to know you were wrong.”
All the panelists advised against objecting during opening, but sometimes a lawyer has no choice, said Pajcic.
“If opposing counsel does something that’s truly reversible and you don’t object, then you can’t raise that on appeal,” he said. “Sometimes you have to do it to preserve the record.”