Capital Gazette Shooter: Defense Attorney Claims Delusions & Mental Disorders

In choosing a jury for the Jarrod Ramos newspaper shooting trial, prosecutors will have to battle the notion that only a crazy person would do what he did. Magna’s Mark Calzaretta points out in Baltimore Sun that there’s a difference between crazy and criminally insane.


Capital Gazette case jury selection to be defined by biases on mental health, media and insanity defense, experts say

When jury selection in the Capital Gazette shooting case begins, attorneys and the judge will try to tease out biases about mental health, the insanity defense and even the media, experts say.

In this case more than any other, half a dozen legal experts said, prosecutors and defense attorneys will seek to find open-minded jurors to ensure a fair trial for the shooter.

Ramos’ defense attorneys likely will look for people who know “mental illness is a reality” and that it could potentially explain “horrific behavior,” said attorney Andrew Jezic. Perhaps that person had a family member or friend who’s afflicted by a condition.

“You just need people that are sympathetic to the inherent failings of human nature,” Jezic said.

Lawyers for both sides will try to eliminate anyone who works in the mental health field, experts said, so that jurors can concentrate on the evidence presented. There are already three sets of psychiatrists and psychologists set to testify in the case.

On the other side, experts said, prosecutors will hope for someone who’s rigid in their thinking, skeptical of the insanity defense. They’ll want to exclude anyone who they perceive as overly sympathetic to mental health issues or who believes the criminal justice system is biased.

Prosecutors also will have to battle the reflex that someone who commits mass murder has to be crazy. It’s not uncommon for that word to be used colloquially following yet another shooting in America.

“There’s some level of crazy with all of this — it has to be; it’s just nuts to do it,” said Mark Calzaretta of Magna Legal Services, “But that doesn’t mean that they’re criminally insane.”

In this already unique case, another unusual element could factor into jury selection: A person’s perception of the press.

Click below to read the full article on baltimoresun.com

Read Full Article

COVID-19 Fears and the Juror Experience During This Time

COVID and the Juror Experience

Measures to address COVID safety while resuming jury trials will evolve based on what the courts and litigants learn in the early days, and on the surge and decrease of COVID rates in different venues.

Article By Hiliary Remick

PUBLISHED IN THE LEGAL INTELLIGENCER ON 2/16/2021

Without question, COVID-19 has overturned familiar patterns in every field including the legal system. When it comes to jury trials, courts around the country are trying to adapt to conduct fair and effective trials while keeping jurors, litigants and court staff safe from infection. As U.S. District Judge Karen Caldwell of Eastern District of Kentucky described her efforts to conduct a COVID-era trial, the process can be “like building an airplane while you’re flying it.” Measures to address COVID safety while resuming jury trials will evolve based on what the courts and litigants learn in the early days, and on the surge and decrease of COVID rates in different venues.

What are the practical implications for litigants of bringing jurors to the courtroom for in-person trials? And perhaps more important, what are the psychological effects on jurors, not just because of the COVID-19 pandemic, but because of the safety measures that are changing how trials work?

Jurors will see firsthand the practical safety precautions at every point of contact with the court, starting with the summons for jury duty and initial letters addressing new rules and possible hardship issues. Jurors might be vetted differently, for example receiving a questionnaire from the court addressing COVID-related risk or hardship. Likely screening measures include temperature checks and questioning at entry, mask and social distancing requirements, barriers, additional cleaning and special handling of exhibits and other materials. Many courts have also reworked outdoor air access and air exchange systems in addition to reconfiguring courtrooms by relocating juror seats and witness boxes and adding plexiglass barriers. For jury selection, trial courts may deploy jurors in smaller groups across separate, larger rooms, and often confine them to the first floor of the courthouse.

Every new decision made about how to organize prospective jurors and any information jurors receive from the court system about COVID-19, including  summons or initial questionnaires, could influence jurors’ trial reactions—reassuring some and rattling others.

This means that lawyers will face subtle but critical problems as they try to communicate with jurors during a civil trial weighed down with COVID-19 safety measures in place. Consider some of the other possible changes in the juror experience:

  • Jurors might object outright to being summoned for jury duty at all if their COVID-19 anxiety level is high. Jurors already tepid toward the idea of jury service might now have new doubts and questions about their health risks. Depending on their social and political views, jurors might feel resentful that the safety measures they do see are either excessive or inadequate.
  • Witnesses, including experts, may be more likely to be presented via live video feed instead of testifying in person. In addition to reducing both COVID-19 exposure and travel costs, jurors in both virtual and in-person trials conducted during the pandemic have reported that this format—as opposed to observing in-person witness testimony given through a mask and on the opposite end of the courtroom—often enhances their ability to visually assess a witness’s facial expressions and other nonverbal cues, which allows them to more easily and accurately evaluate a witness’s overall communication effectiveness and credibility. Some jurors may speculate as to why a particular witness was not physically present in court when jurors are required to be there. To address this speculation and to ameliorate any associated resentment jurors may harbor, litigants might request a  judicial admonishment at the outset of trial regarding the fact that some witnesses will testify remotely in order to reduce the number of individuals allowed in the courtroom and thereby minimize COVID-19 exposure for all.
  • Jurors could also be frustrated by their inability to see and gauge facial expressions of masked lawyers and witnesses as to credibility and demeanor. They might fail to develop a rapport with masked witnesses or attorneys, for example.
  • Where the court allows counsel to unmask at certain points (e.g., during oral argument) in the trial, jurors might question why the attorneys don’t have to follow the same rules and face the same dangers as them. As with remote witnesses, this could raise juror concerns about inconsistency and unfairness in the courtroom.


What can lawyers do to defuse juror concern or anxiety as we feel our way forward? Reassure jurors. Communicate with the court, counsel and jurors about the special measures in place. Acknowledge juror fears or doubts and honor their service in an exceptional time.

  • In pretrial conferences, encourage the court to make clear how voir dire and all courtroom contact will go for the sake of predictability for everyone in the courtroom, including jurors.
  • Recognize that courts are exploring creative solutions to reduce risk to all trial participants, and litigants must be ready to adapt. For example, in several jurisdictions, courts have required virtual jury selection followed by an in-person trial in the courtroom or an alternative space. While virtual jury selection is not a first choice when it comes to getting a feel for juror demeanor, it may be unavoidable in some jurisdictions.
  • Capitalize on any opportunity to include a COVID-related question or two in any pretrial questionnaire your judge might present to jurors. Learn what you can about individual jurors’ COVID-19 issues and concerns that need to be uncovered. Do highlight any special health concerns or vulnerabilities unique to a particular juror’s risk. Do any of the answers telegraph a reluctance to serve?
  • Look for opportunities during voir dire to ask one or two COVID-related questions. For example, how much personal impact has COVID-19 had on you? Has COVID-19 raised more concerns for you related to the economy, or related to your health or your family’s health?
  • Reinforce the judge’s guidance about jury service. Talk about the right to a jury trial, which is an integral part of our legal system, and about how important their service is, especially during a time of challenge for our jurors. Jurors can be compared to essential workers and reminded that the special measures in the courtroom are designed to keep jurors safe.
  • Prepare to hear more jurors request excusals on the basis of COVID-related hardship for themselves or their families. This can result in a lower yield from the pool and may require a larger pool as well as more time for the jury selection process. You should also allow for a higher risk of losing jurors during the trial and perhaps consider seating more alternates.
  • Reassure jurors by showing that you and your client take seriously—and follow—the rules, and that your team appreciates and champions the efforts of everyone in the courtroom to stay safe.
  • Recognize that some people just may not be able to get past their fears based on their psychological makeup or personal challenges and obligations at home—and that they should be excused for hardship.
  • Let jurors know you recognize their experience and realize it is not easy. Acknowledge their extra challenges of seeing, hearing, and feeling safe. Consider a clear face shield that at least allows jurors to see your expressions, even if you can’t see theirs.
  • Ask the court to explain any special arrangements whereby witnesses are remote, or counsel is unmasked, at certain points in the trial. Suggest a  specific instruction for jurors along these lines: “The special COVID-19 measures you have seen in the courtroom, including for example remote witnesses and counsel addressing jurors without masks during certain times in the trial, are measures the court has required, are necessary for the smooth administration of the trial, and are not the fault of any litigant in the case. You are not to consider those measures in evaluating your verdict in this case. The court has asked the parties to assist in reducing exposure for everyone in the courtroom, including for you as jurors, by encouraging remote testimony. This helps reduce exposure to witnesses who may otherwise have to travel in airplanes and through large airports, which could put all people inside the courtroom at greater risk.”

Conclusion

Showing jurors that you mean to work with the court and other parties to make the trial run smoothly through a combination of sacrifice and creativity will help build trust for jurors that they are participating in a fair process. Above all, make sure that your case is one that jurors can believe is consequential and plausible, so they know that their sacrifice in coming to the courthouse during the pandemic was made for a good reason.

Click to Read Article on Law.com >>

Plaintiff Attorneys Often Use ‘Reptile Theory’ to Win Nuclear Trucking Jury Verdicts, Experts Say

In 2009, two prominent trial attorneys introduced a litigation tactic known as the “reptile theory,” a strategy that aims to stoke fear and anger in the minds of jurors and, ultimately, compel them to hand down massive verdicts in civil lawsuits. In trucking accident lawsuits, it’s a method plaintiff lawyers have deployed in pursuit of so-called “nuclear” jury verdicts, those resulting in judgments of $10 million or more against motor carriers.

“In trucking cases, the reptile strategy is almost a given,” Dr. Rachel York Colangelo, Magna’s National Managing Director of Jury Consulting, told Transport Topics. “And it’s been very effective with jurors.”

She added, “There are buzzwords that will be coming in cases that will always be a red flag — words like ‘safety,’ ‘training,’ ‘community,’ ‘accountability.’ They let you know that the plaintiff attorney is headed down the reptile road.”

On that road, they’ll typically examine not just the accident, but also a carrier’s safety profiles and procedures, ranging from driver hiring, training and supervision to truck maintenance and use of motor carrier data.

Click here to read the full Transport Topics article, originally published on 1/19/2021.

The Few Patent Jury Trials In 2020 Led To Enormous Verdicts

The few patent jury trials that were able to take place in 2020 had some of the largest verdicts of the past decade. Magna’s National Managing Director of Jury Consulting, Rachel York Colangelo, Ph.D., spoke with Law360 about the tendency of juries “to slap the defendant in a way that gets their attention” when they believe corporations have intentionally acted unethically.

In her article, published on 12/22/2020, Law360’s Dani Kass wrote:

The COVID-19 pandemic saw patent trial after patent trial delayed and ultimately pushed into 2021, but the few jury trials that did go forward across the nation had some of the largest verdicts of the last decade.

This year featured three jury verdicts that surpassed $500 million, along with a nearly $2 billion judgment from a bench trial. On top of that, Apple paid off a judgment worth nearly a half-billion dollars, and a $752 million verdict against Kite Pharma from 2019 surpassed $1 billion when final judgment was entered in April.

Click here to read the full Law360 article.

Effectively Communicating With Jurors In A Patent Case

Webinar originally aired live on 12.16.2020

Law.com covered a great webinar that aired live last week, hosted by Magna Legal Services and Winston & Strawn.

“I felt like I learned more about IP trial strategy in one hour Wednesday from Alan Albright, Tom Melsheimer, Matt Powers and Rachel York Colangelo than I did during the rest of 2020″, Law.com reporter, Scott Graham stated.

“Maybe it was Winston & Strawn partner Mike Tomasulo‘s easygoing style of moderating, or maybe it was Tensegrity Law partner Matt Powers‘ tranquil Zoom background. Whatever it was, Winston and Magna Legal Services‘ webinar, “Effectively Communicating With Jurors in a Patent Case,” had the feel of IP trial veterans sharing tricks of the trade over cocktails—with some jury research science thrown in for good measure.”

Click here to read key takeaways in the full Law.com article

Moderated by:
– Michael A Tomasulo, Partner, Winston & Strawn

Panelists include:
– Judge Alan D Albright, District Court Judge, Western District of Texas
– Tom Melsheimer, Dallas Managing Partner, Winston & Strawn
– Matt Powers, Partner, Tensegrity Law Group
– Rachel York Colangelo, Ph.D., National Managing Director Jury Consulting, Magna Legal Services

Hosted by:
– Peter Hecht, Partner & Executive Vice President of Sales, Magna Legal Services
– Meredith Cherry, Business Development Manager, Magna Legal Services

Click here to view more upcoming webinars and conferences by Magna

Epstein Case: Ghislaine Maxwell’s Deposition Transcript Unsealed

The 2016 transcript pertains to a defamation lawsuit filed in New York and was produced by Magna Legal Service’s Court Reporting.

Read Ghislaine Maxwell’s original deposition here.
PDF retrieved from The New York Times.

Magna Legal Services again gains national recognition for its good work in providing court reporting services in the deposition of Ghislaine Maxwell.

We are proud of our court reporters who give us the reputation as the international go-to court reporting and litigation consulting company for large, important and well-known cases.

Magna made its way into all of the top news stories through Ghislaine Maxwell’s deposition transcript that just got unsealed yesterday morning, October 22nd.

People can now read the 2016 transcript, which is all over the press and twitter, and has Magna’s logo on almost every page!. 

No matter the case, Magna always brings that same award-winning reliability.

Click to learn more about Magna’s in-person court reporting and virtual deposition services.

Florida vs Erin Robinson: Jury & Trial Strategy. Ross Suter weighs in on Court TV

Aired live on 10.20.2020

Live on Court TV yesterday, Magna’s Ross Suter weighed in on the Florida vs. Erin Robinson “Jealous Lover Murder Trial” and how new COVID protocols can affect the trial.

The plaintiff is a Florida man, Erin Robinson, who is facing decades in prison for allegedly brutally beating a man to death for making comments to his girlfriend. Yesterday, 12 jurors and 2 alternates were selected for the trial.

“While we call it jury selection… the defense side is looking to ‘de-select’ jurors”, Ross Suter said while discussing voir dire strategy.

Watch above for the full Court TV recording, where Ross Suter explains how social distancing, masks, face-shields and people’s unwilliness to show up for jury duty may affect the trial.

Magna Legal Services Opens Colorado Office

Magna Legal Services, a nation-wide jury research, litigation graphics, medical records collection and court reporting company, opened a new office in Colorado to better serve the Denver legal industry. Magna’s Joseph Glenn is taking his decade of legal support experience to Colorado to lead business development in the new office located at 9250 E. Costilla Avenue, Suite 130, Greenwood Village, CO 80112.

Joe Glenn is a Bucknell University alumnus, holding a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration. After 5 years of working for Chicago’s leading trial consulting firm, Creative Counsel, he joined Magna’s Chicago team when Magna acquired his company in 2015. There, Joe demonstrated his ability to assist clients with reducing litigation spend and designing custom programs to secure more successful case outcomes.

“2020 has sure been a tough year… and I think we could all agree that we hate COVID-19! Magna’s move into Denver was in motion prior to the pandemic and we have been active in the Colorado market since our company founded 2007. Joe’s industry experience will be a great asset to all the Mile High City litigators and trial attorneys. ”

PETER HECHT, Magna co-founding Partner & Executive VP of Sales

Conference rooms for hosting depositions are available at the Magna’s Colorado location at no extra charge when used with a Magna LS court reporter. Additionally, Magna is still providing complimentary use of their virtual deposition platform with a Magna court reporter, which includes free tech support monitoring & user training (limited time during COVID-crisis).

About Magna:
Magna Legal Services provides end-to-end legal support services with 100% remote capabilities to law firms, corporations and governmental agencies throughout the nation. With a mission to deliver legal support in a high-quality, reliable and responsive manner, Magna provides strategic advantages to clients at every stage of the litigation cycle, including:

  • Court Reporting
  • Virtual Depositions, Mediations, Hearings & Arbitrations
  • Record Retrieval Services
  • Interpreting & Translation Services
  • Jury Consulting
  • Witness Preparation
  • Online Focus Groups & Mock Trials
  • Social Media Surveillance
  • Trial Graphics Consulting
  • Accident Recreation Videos
  • Trial Presentation
  • Video Services (& Certified Legal Videography)
  • Courtroom & War Room set-up
  • & more!

This article was originally published on October 13, 2020 by PRWeb

Strategies for Successful Virtual Courtroom Proceedings: Webinar by WAWTA

Webinar originally aired live on August 20, 2020

“In-person civil proceedings may be making a comeback in a few parts of the country, but virtual litigation is going to remain the order of the day for awhile longer.”

Law.com covered a great webinar that took place last week, “Strategies for Successful Virtual Courtroom Proceedings”, presented by the Washington Area Women Trial Attorneys and hosted by Magna’s own Canby B. Wood, Esq.

In May 2020, a Texas court held the nation’s first jury trial via Zoom. WAWTA’s webinar featured Judge Miskel, who presided over that case, as well as U.S. District Judge Paul Grimm, and other expert panelists. Watch the full webinar recording above to hear the panelists as discuss the future of remote courtroom proceedings in a COVID-19 world and new litigation strategies, including best practices for virtual hearings, trials, and motion arguments.

Law.com journalist Scott Graham wrote:

Texas state court Judge Emily Miskel was the star of the 90-minute webinar. Miskel presided over the nation’s first remote jury trial in May, and it sounded as if virtual proceedings have become second nature for her. “I finished up a bench trial today at lunchtime and we had about 24 people watching on YouTube,” she said.

Miskel said that four of the 12 jurors who served on her May trial had previously served on in-person juries, and reported that they could see witnesses and evidence on Zoom better than they could when seated from an angle, across a large courtroom. “I know many judges and attorneys are cautious about whether you can judge a witness’ credibility on Zoom,” she said, but the feedback from participants has been positive.

Click here to view the full Law.com article.

Webinar Speakers:

  • Judge Paul W. Grimm, United States District Court for the District of Maryland
  • Judge Emily Miskel, 470th District Court, Collin County, Texas
  • Michelle S. Kallen, Deputy Solicitor General, Office of Attorney General of Virginia
  • Katherine A. Helm, Partner, Dechert

Co-Moderators:

  • Sarah A. Tomkowiak, Partner, Latham & Watkins
  • Sarah M. Gragert, Counsel, Latham & Watkins

Introductory Statements:

  • Canby Wood, Esq., Magna Legal Services; Co-Founder, Washington Area Women Trial Attorneys
  • Judge Mark A. Drummond, Circuit Court Judge, 8th Judicial Circuit of Illinois (Retired); Judicial Director, Civil Jury Project

Click here to view more upcoming webinars and conferences by Magna