THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL 74 | NOVEMBER 2025 Law Practice Tips By Julie Bays When the Jury Trial Is Rare: Learning To Be Unpredictable, Human and Adaptable 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.”1 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
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTk3MQ==