The Trial Technologist's View » Presentation Technique

Ben Stevens shows us how to print handouts in Keynote

Blake Boyd — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 18:49:40 +0000

I was reading an article today on SBOT.org (which is the state bar of Texas’ Technology sections blog) about “story boarding” presentations for the courtroom. Pretty interesting article and I agree with the philosphy. But what caught my eye is this quote:

“Practice Tip: If you’re using a Powerpoint (or Keynote) to persuade a Judge, create a Handout for him/her.

I don’t think I’ve ever recommended a client to do that, I always print out copies but they are normally for the attorneys to have in hand while giving the presentation or for producing to opposing counsel to review. That’s something I’m always going to suggest from now on.

Literally 45 seconds later I click on over to The Mac Lawyer and notice Ben Stevens has recently posted a great walk-through on how to print handouts in Keynote.
Thanks for the help Ben, perfect timing!

What you need to know about LCD Monitors in the Courtroom

Blake Boyd — Tue, 04 May 2010 19:22:21 +0000

Technology is cheap! Acquiring a full courtroom monitor setup (plaintiff, defense, witness, judge, dual display) would cost a fortune only a couple years ago. Now you can have a slick outfit for a relatively good price. But don’t let this confuse you…

Take a quick look online and without much searching you can find a 22″ LCD monitor from companies like Acer that are under $200 and are actually pretty good looking screens. In my last trial, the competitor Litigation Support company set up 7 of them. SEVEN 22″ monitors strung throughout the courtroom. It was like walking into a technology wonderland. I really like the way it looked, but I knew how it would not perform well.

All the monitors were run through a switch that allowed for each monitor to be turned off or on in any combination. All the technology was wired and setup properly, and it ran without a hitch. But there was a huge issue, size…

The screen that was on the witness stand was so large that you could only see the face of the person testifying. My client had to turn his monitor sideways in order to see the judge and witness easier. Defense counsel left theirs up and the Judge seemed pleased with her monitors placement. But just the vast size of these monitors made it hard to see people in the courtroom.

It’s something we should all consider when choosing what piece of technology to bring into the courtroom. Going along with my theory that the technology should be as transparent as possible, the large LCD monitors just don’t fit into the equation. Ideally everyone should be able to view the projection screen, but if there isn’t a position where everyone can, I make sure that at least the judge and jury have a great view of the big screen.

I don’t see any point in bringing in screens larger than 15″-17″. I actually prefer 15″ but they are getting harder to find. The brand/model we are these Sony 15″, unfortunately they are discontinued. Also issue to note is that none of the major trial technology presentation software packages take advantage of a monster windscreen LCD properly.

I would also stress that placement is a big issue, the monitors should be as out of sight as possible, while still viewable. The easiest way to determine if a location is good is to sit behind it and look around at what you can and can’t see. Ideally the screen should not block anything.

Adobe TV Reveals CS5 Launch

Edgar Hernandez — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 04:16:53 +0000

Adobe TV revealed the CS5 launch today, with the Creative Suite 5 Production Premium Kit, it’s pricey – but reaming with the goods needed for any designer serious about their work.. The kit includes an upgraded Photoshop with “Truer Edge, which has better edge detecting technology, and of course Content-Aware Fill, which definitely looks like magic.”

With 64-bit applications built from the ground up, that means we can now render video files much faster and provide a better service for our clients with all their video needs.

CS5 Production

Simple Features of Adobe Acrobat

Chuck Floyd — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 14:11:06 +0000

Adobe Acrobat has some amazing and simple features that do not come in the free download of Adobe Reader. Probably one of my personal favorites, is the ability to combine .pdf’s, insert and extract pages as well as separate all pages into separate files. Ok, simple you say whats so amazing about that? Well from experience, I know it’s time consuming to open a document page-by-page, document-by-document. It’s convenient to combine them, and be able to scroll through all of the pages at once without having to open and close files. Also sometimes you may only want to produce certain pages, the extract pages feature then might come into play. Until next time…

Medical Illustrations

Blake Boyd — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 16:40:40 +0000

Listening to a doctor explain a procedure is one of the most difficult topics for a jury to visualize. Any case that involves injuries, whether it be a medical malpractice suit or a car wreck benefits from a quality medical illustration or animation. DLS does not create our own medical illustrations for use in our presentations, this is a very specialized field that takes a graphic designer with an extensive medical background. We suggest our clients to use a company based out of Dallas named MediVisuals.

While I can’t attest to how many illustrations they have, I do know that I’ve never had a client make a request they couldn’t produce. The downfall of using a company such as MediVisuals is the cost, while each illustration differs in price, they are normally very cost prohibitive for smaller cases (car wrecks), but are extremely useful if your case can justify the cost.

The next time you have a case involving an injury or botched medical procedure, put yourself in a jurors shoes… Would you be able to visualize what your expert is discussing? If not, I highly recommend using medical illustrations or animations.

One Tech to Serve Them All?

Blake Boyd — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:48:21 +0000

I’ve worked for both sides on multiple occasions and oddly enough the majority of the time it’s at the request of my client. Cost is the reason I see it being suggested the most. The question you have to ask yourself is; will I save enough to make it beneficial to my case?

If the case is straight forward (we still work a lot of car wrecks) and there really isn’t much trial strategy involved other than presenting the evidence and facts, I think it can be very useful. Our role in these cases usually involves making clips, and calling up documents. I might create a few opening/closing slides for either side. And that’s about it.

Note that it does benefit both sides, the speed of the trial, and the general organization of the parties. In many matters, if the costs weren’t shared it would not be cost effective to use our services in the trial. It is amazing how quickly a trial speeds up when there is very little fumbling around and looking for misplaced exhibits. I think the jury, judge, and court staff appreciate it as well. Everything just flows smoother.

Now that’s a small minority of the cases that benefit from the use of Trial Technology, and the only situation where I would suggest or support the idea. Where technology really shines is when the case is complex, hard to understand, and involves hundreds of videos and hundreds of thousands of documents. In these situations I think the experience, knowledge and overall qualities of the individual Trial Tech’s come into play.

Another benefit of is on many occasions I pull a document up for my client and when the opposing attorney wants to cross examine on that document, they find they don’t have it scanned. This doesn’t happen when the Tech is working on both sides. Either it’s loaded or not (and when it’s not we rush to scan it).

Those two “convenience” reasons are the only real reasons why a large trial should share a Tech. Cost should not be one, and these are the reasons I explain to my clients:

You need independence to gain an additional outside view. A competent Trial Tech might have some great suggestions for topics/questions the attorney might have overlooked. When I’m working on both sides, I keep my mouth shut.

Also, the added stress of having giving your trial strategy to someone that is working for the other side makes for some awkward situations. I’ve never run been asked about the trial strategy of my client from opposing counsel, but if you potentially had millions at stake, how would you feel about having open trial strategy communications in front of “some guy” that is about to go meet with your adversary? It just doesn’t work. This single issue is big enough to forget about sharing a trial tech, we’re just too involved in the inner working of the case.

Another problem that is bound to come up is how do you separate the time restraints? You’ve only got one trial tech, how can they make clips during no examination times? What about at night, who gets those few valuable hours of the Tech’s time? The answer can’t be “bring on another tech” as you can then wave your cost savings away.

There are many reasons not to share a Trial Tech these are just some of them. I’ll stress again, it’s not the best idea if the case has any complexity to it at all. The only time that it would be feasible is if the case is small with not many disagreements nor strategy.