By Julie Bays

During my 17 years as a white-collar crime prosecutor, I can count on one hand the number of jury trials I actually conducted. Most cases were resolved through plea negotiations, motions or other settlements. As a result, when a jury trial finally arrived, I never felt entirely prepared.

Recently, my friend, Steve Embry, captured this point in an article urging lawyers to “be unpredictable, look out the window, and turn off ChatGPT.” His words reminded me that persuading a jury is not about rigid adherence to a script. It is about connection, adaptability and authenticity.

ROUTINE MEETS REALITY

Lawyers are naturally drawn to structure and routine. We create outlines, prepare demonstratives and rehearse arguments. These practices are important, but jurors are not evaluating us on technical precision alone. While our training and experience emphasize careful preparation and organization, the heart of a jury trial lies in something less tangible. Jurors are searching for authenticity and human connection; they want to sense the story beneath the structure and see the lawyer as a credible guide instead of a scripted performer.

What the jury cares about is trust. They want to know whether they can believe the story we are telling. A lawyer who rigidly follows a script risks missing the cues jurors are giving in real time. By contrast, the lawyer who adapts to a witness’s hesitation or acknowledges a juror’s reaction is the one who earns credibility.

LESSONS FROM RARE JURY TRIALS

Consider a typical moment that often arises during a trial – when a witness begins to struggle under questioning and is unable to recall specific dates or details with complete accuracy. This situation, in which the witness hesitates and searches for the right information, highlights the unpredictability of courtroom proceedings and underscores the importance of adaptability and authenticity on the part of the attorney.

The prepared outline rarely anticipates these stumbles. The instinct may be to redirect quickly or gloss over the gaps. Yet, when counsel pauses to ask clarifying questions in plain language, something important happens. Jurors lean forward. They see an advocate working through the problem in front of them, not merely running a script.

These unscripted exchanges reveal a deeper truth: The courtroom is not a theater for flawless delivery but a forum where credibility is earned through transparency. When a lawyer engages openly with a witness’s uncertainty, jurors are invited into the process. They recognize that the attorney is committed to uncovering the truth, even if it means navigating ambiguity or discomfort.

Jurors are remarkably perceptive. They notice when an attorney slows down, listens carefully and treats a witness with patience rather than frustration. Far from eroding authority, this approach strengthens it. Authenticity, demonstrated through humility and adaptability, often resonates more strongly than a seamless performance.

These are the moments jurors remember. They become markers of integrity, serving as signs that the lawyer is not hiding behind a script or technology but is willing to engage honestly with the realities of trial. In the end, it is this willingness to adapt and show humanity that transforms a rare trial into a memorable one, building trust in both the advocate and the case itself.

TECHNOLOGY AS SUPPORT, NOT A CENTERPIECE

The past two decades have transformed the courtroom. Trial presentation software, digital exhibits and interactive timelines can now be pulled up with a click. Visuals are cleaner, evidence is easier to organize, and complex information can be displayed in ways that would have been impossible with paper exhibits alone. Jurors benefit from these tools because they reduce confusion and help create order in an otherwise overwhelming stream of testimony and evidence.

However, technology is not persuasion by itself. Jurors are not present to evaluate graphics, admire polished transitions or watch a perfectly timed animation. What they are judging is the credibility of the case and the lawyer presenting it. A closing argument packed with dynamic slides may dazzle, but if the attorney never makes eye contact or responds to the jurors’ reactions, the substance is lost behind the screen.

The lawyers who use technology most effectively are those who know when to step away from it. A well-timed demonstration can bring clarity to a financial transaction or a timeline of events. Yet, when the proceedings reach an emotional climax, such as a witness reliving trauma or a victim’s family sharing their grief, it is often the lawyer’s deliberate silence that speaks the loudest. In these moments, the absence of words paired with attentive presence can create a space for genuine emotion and connection that no technological display can match. Jurors are far more likely to remember the impact of a lawyer’s respectful quiet than any animated graphic or visual aid.

There is also the danger of overreliance. Anyone who has practiced in court knows the anxiety of the frozen laptop or the exhibit that refuses to load. Technology failures not only disrupt flow but can also undercut juror confidence in the lawyer’s preparation. Having a simple backup, such as a printed timeline, a whiteboard sketch or even a handout demonstrates foresight and steadiness under pressure.

Practical takeaways include:

• Choose demonstratives that are simple and flexible. A cluttered slide distracts; a clean visual clarifies.
• Always have a backup plan. Jurors respect preparedness when technology stumbles.
• Build in flexibility. Organize visuals so that they can be shown out of order if testimony shifts.
• Know when to stop. Step away from the screen and speak directly to the jury when the moment demands authenticity.
• Technology should serve as scaffolding, not the structure itself. The strongest impression is left not by the tools a lawyer uses but how a lawyer connects with the jurors while using them.

GUIDANCE FOR LAWYERS WITH LIMITED JURY EXPERIENCE

Many lawyers rarely see the inside of a jury box. For those attorneys, the following practices are especially useful:

• Keep a beginner’s mindset. Fewer trials can actually make you more attentive to jurors’ cues.
• Practice adaptability. Rehearse not only your lines but also potential pivots.
• Watch and listen. Jurors communicate constantly through body language and attention.
• Embrace imperfection. A pause or stumble can come across as authentic rather than weak.
• Do not let technology control you. Use it but remain present with the jurors.
• Reflect afterward. Study juror reactions and evaluate what worked or fell flat.

CONCLUSION

Few of us have the opportunity to try dozens of jury cases. That scarcity can create anxiety, but it can also sharpen our awareness. When trial comes, it is important to remember that jurors are persuaded less by rigid perfection and more by genuine engagement.

Steve Embry’s reminder to be unpredictable is not an argument against preparation. It is an invitation to leave space for the human element. Prepare thoroughly, but also be ready to adjust, listen and connect. In the end, jurors decide cases not just on the facts presented but also on the advocate’s ability to meet them as people.

Ms. Bays is the OBA Management Assistance Program director. Need a quick answer to a tech problem or help solving a management dilemma? Contact her at 405-416-7031, 800-522-8060 or julieb@okbar.org. It’s a free member benefit.

Originally published in the Oklahoma Bar Journal — November, 2025 — Vol. 96, No. 9