May the Record Reflect

In our second interview on The Effective Deposition, Program Director and author Carl Chamberlin returns to the podcast to talk about witness preparation. Joining him is NITA Trustee and Program Director Whitney Untiedt, and together they share tips and perspectives on witness prep sessions and how to ready your witness for the procedural and substantive aspects of being deposed. Carl and Whitney also talk about the ethics obligations of counsel and the ramifications of the recent ABA Formal Opinion 508. 7:20   Timing and length of prep sessions12:52 Tips to optimize prep21:09 Procedure and process of being deposed23:07 One concept and three rules28:37 How witnesses should answer34:15 Answering after an objection36:21 Handling opposing counsels’ tactics45:42 Goal of substantive preparation49:54 Reluctance to disclose55:57 Ethics obligations58:28 Demo|1:02:20  Implications of ABA Formal Op. 5081:08:03  Signoff questions Quote“We as lawyer operate on ‘our’ time. Our time is valuable, and our time is calculated in six-minute increments, and our time is scheduled to within an inch of our lives, but when we sit down with our witness for a depo prep session, it’s no longer our time. It’s our witness’s time. This is their time to shine.” Whitney UntiedtResourcesCarl Chamberlin (LinkedIn)Whitney Untiedt (LinkedIn)The Effective Deposition: Techniques and Strategies that Work (book)Beginning the Effective Deposition, with Carl Chamberlin (podcast)Whitney Untiedt Puts the “Pro” in Pro Bono (podcast)Deposition Skills: Florida (course)ABA Formal Op. 508 (opinion)

Content warning: Mentions of sexual assault. Brief, non-graphic discussions of questioning the venire about sexual assault occur at 32:20–32:59 and 42:25–44:34.Experienced trial lawyers are accustomed to being the ones asking the questions, but in this episode, NITA NextGen faculty member Adam Kendall finds himself in the hot seat for once.  He’s answering our questions about voir dire: building rapport with the venire through icebreakers and humor, eliciting useful information from potential jurors while introducing bad facts about your case, and what you can glean from jury questionnaires. Adam also talks about the developing trend of limiting or eliminating peremptory strikes. Topics3:39   Primary goal of voir dire4:06   What to pay attention to5:09   “The quiet one”9:03   Icebreakers to build rapport11:18 Voir dire by the judge14:22 Strong personalities among jurors16;25 Ideal foreperson qualities17:50 Eliciting strong opinions and reactions19:19 Introducing bad facts21:12 Using humor24:12 Signaling legal issues26:27 Nationwide changes in peremptory strikes32:05 Jury questionnaires35:53 Online research of the venire41:50 War stories46:50 Signoff questions Quote“People who are too eager to be on a jury scare me.” Adam Kendall ResourcesAdam Kendall (LinkedIn)Building Trial Skills: New Orleans (course)Not Just for Trial! How to Use Exhibits from Day One (Register for Adam's live webcast on March 26, 2024)

Taking a deposition presents enough challenge as it is without the interference of obstreperous or obstructive counsel, yet it happens anyway and you must be prepared to deal with it. Following her appearance on a NITA panel webcast on depositions in November 2023, Assistant U.S. Attorney and Wilmington Law professor Veronica Finkelstein returns to NITA’s studio71 to answer viewers’ questions about how to manage misbehavior in the deposition room. She also reveals how to be a passionate advocate for your client without crossing those lines yourself, to reclaim your time when the opposition wastes it, and to wield the unexpected power of a deposition binder.Topics4:16    Counsel who won’t control their client8:36    Witnesses “forgetting” their records12:14 Counsel who try to confuse your witness15:46 Disruptive, but not inappropriate, objections19:21 Tracking time wasted on abusive conduct23:26 Court reporter tracking wasted time27:21 Being zealous but not obstreperous29:37 Speaking objections35:05 Continuing objections39:51 Written discovery requests43:36 “The usual stipulations”46:58 Contents of a deposition binder57:07 Signoff questions Quote“People get pretty quiet when you have the controlling case in your jurisdiction in your hand and they have nothing.” Veronica Finkelstein ResourcesVeronica Finkelstein (LinkedIn)Reduce the Abuse: Managing Obstructive Opposing Counsel During Depositions (webcast)Building Trial Skills: Colorado (course)

Cognitive bias is a barrier that lawyers must overcome in court—and it’s not just biases of the jurors they must consider, but those, too, of the judge, opposing counsel, expert witnesses, and even one’s own self. New Orleans trial legend Dominic Gianna returns to May the Record Reflect to talk about how persuasion science can help you clear the tricky bias barrier. He presents the five most consequential cognitive biases to trial lawyers, the impact each has on fact finders, and suggests how you can connect with a diversity of jurors in the post-truth era. Topics4:08    What is cognitive bias?6:55    Five common cognitive biases7:35    Confirmation bias10:40 Anchoring bias13:31 Hindsight bias18:00 Availability bias24:48 Dom’s mantras for helping jurors process information25:35 Affinity bias28:52 Stupid lawyer tricks32:18 Impact of our own biases34:36 Biases from the bench39:42 Appealing to a panel of judges42:24 Expert witnesses bias impact on testimony, interpretation of evidence44:09 Cognitive biases of opposing counsel47:06 Persuasion in the post-truth era57:51 Signoff questions Quote“Jurors don’t vote for the evidence. They vote for their views, and so as advocates, we have the obligation to our clients to try to understand those views. Where did those views come from? Where are they based? What attitudes, beliefs, and values, led these people, this person—this particular person—to a belief system that is so strong that he or she will ignore information that seemingly contradicts that confirmation bias?” Dominic Gianna ResourcesDominic Gianna (LinkedIn)Deposition Skills and Trial Skills: New Orleans (courses)“Give ’em the Ol’ Razzle Dazzle (podcast episode)“The Secrets of Persuasive Legal Storytelling,” with David Mann (podcast episode)“Off Broadway and Into Court,” with Kevin Newbury and Kate Douglas (podcast episode)

Many a young idealist register for law school with visions of Atticus Finch dancing in their heads, but only the rarest few have those dreams come true. NITA Trustee Emeritus and national treasure James Brosnahan is among them. In Episode 49, this legendary legend reflects on a life in law that has included face-to-face encounters with such cognoscenti as Chief Justice Warren Burger, Senator Orrin Hatch, and the Kennedys. He also talks about his viral LinkedIn series on vocal quality and breaks down the six essential qualities of a commanding speaking voice that have served him well over his 60+ years in the courtroom. 4:28   Voice quality videos on LinkedIn9:05   Evaluating your own voice quality11:25 Tempo17:22 Volume20:53 Tone and mood25:16 Warmup exercises28:20 Emphasis and emotion30:06 Speech harmonizing and collecting voices35:15 Favorite voices37:05 Clarity42:59 Pauses41:57 Arguing before SCOTUS52:04 Interrogation by Orrin Hatch56:21 Controversial representations1:00:16 Defending the Constitution1:03:35 Speaking truth to power1:07:29 Boston Irish and the Kennedy agenda1:14:39 What Jim has learned at NITA1:19:03 Signoff questionsQuote“The goal, which is not easy, is to be like an actor who can throw the voice up into the second balcony. That’s what you want to do. The equivalent in trial is to be sure that every word that you pronounce is heard by Juror 1 in the back row and Juror 6 in the back row, because if they haven’t heard what you’ve said, it’s like it never happened.” Jim Brosnahan ResourcesJim Brosnahan (bio)Jim’s video series (LinkedIn)Justice at Trial: Courtroom Battles and Groundbreaking Cases (book)Publio Delgado, speech harmonizer (YouTube)

Every trial advocate enters the courtroom hoping for a “one and done” decision that favors their client. But appeals do happen, and if you’re waiting until the verdict is read before you start thinking about what comes next, you’re already bringing up the rear. Judge Randall Warner of the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County joins the podcast to discuss the potential appeal issues you should be thinking about during litigation, the pretrial phase, and at trial; what issues are ripe for appeal (and which ones aren’t) and their impact on your trial strategy; and how to preserve the record for appeal in real time. He also lets you in on what he says are the most undervalued, hence underutilized, tools in your advocacy kit and how you should be using them to your advantage.Topics3:35   Different considerations for different trials5:10   Common mistakes6:13   Basics of appeals8:59   Reverse-engineering your case10:24 Appellate specialist on the trial team11:22 Good appeal issues13:00 Bundling your issues14:10 Poor appeal issues15:06 Pretrial preservation considerations16:11 Motions in limine}17:52 Bench memoranda19:57 Preservation at trial22:20 Objections and evidence26:16 Staying in the judge’s good graces27:17 Jury instructions31:22 Verdict forms38:49 Damages40:38 Bench memorandum for jury instructions42:12 Motion to acquit45:26 Career advice to younger self46:33 Signoff questions Quote“I’m a fan of bundling issues. So, for example, if you’ve got one issue that’s a sufficiency of evidence issue and another that’s a jury instruction issue and a third issue that’s an evidentiary objection or a couple evidentiary objections, and they all point to the same wrong result, those issues — independent of what the standard of review may be on any one of them — kind of work together to create an argument for prejudice for the case overall.” Judge Randall WarnerResourcesJudge Randall Warner (bio)“All Mixed Up about Statutes: Distinguishing Interpretation from Application” (article)“All Mixed Up about Mixed Questions” (article)“Efficiency in Motion” (article)

At a time when more cases settle than go to trial, the deposition has become of utmost significance. Our guest Carl Chamberlin draws upon his experience taking and defending depositions in private practice as well as teaching deposition skills for 30 years. As the new author of The Effective Deposition, the topic is top of mind lately for Carl, so he joins us to talk about how to kick off a truly effective deposition with introductory matters and preliminary and substantive questioning techniques—and he even asks a few questions of his own. Topics3:22   The purpose of depositions6:20   Difference between gathering information and obtaining information10:38 Why depositions are important12:30 Physical settings for remote depositions14:15 The “usual stipulations”17:20 Getting commitments21:27 Commitments in remote depositions24:42 Preliminary questions29:51 Structure of substantive questioning33:30 First demo36:57 Key phrases for asking open-ended questions38:25 And ones to avoid43:01 Drilling down into a substantive topic44:18 Second demo1:04:19 Paying attention and listening1:06:40 Using exhibits1:10:15 Dealing with interruptions1:13:56 Carl’s early depositions1:16:53 The Effective Deposition1:21:36 Signoff questions Quote“We want to make our questions clear and concise. Simple. The clearer the question, the better the answer. The fewer the objections, the more powerful it is.” Carl Chamberlin ResourcesCarl Chamberlin (LinkedIn)NITA Publications (book)

Content Warning: A brief, non-graphic mention of a sex crime case occurring from 29:34 to 30:49.Everyone likes to start off on the right foot, and your opening statement is a crucial place to do it. It’s also Assistant U.S. Attorney Brooke Latta’s favorite part of trial, so she joined the podcast to discuss her best tips on telling the right story, using visual aids for maximum impact, and pulling out all the stops to captivate your jurors. She also talks about some of her own openings at trial and what she holds to be the G.O.A.T. of opening statements. Timestamps & MoreTopics3:00   What’s fun about openings?4:07   Rhetorical and legal goals6:05   Crafting an opening8:46   Workshopping it10:54 Figuring out the right story to tell13:00  Telling auditory stories for visual consumers14:36 Some good don’ts15:30 Visual aids17:10 Court clearance for visual aids19:01 Objections21:53 Case weaknesses23:50 Closing your opening24:42 Openings and closings, compare and contrast26:42 Brooke’s favorite example of a great opening32:35 Signoff questions Quote“Something I always do is I talk to jurors like they are a friend that I’m having a martini with and I’m sitting across the table from. And I’m just talking to that friend about something that’s a very serious, very important issue — and I’m keeping it simple, I’m keeping it concise — so it’s a serious tone, but it’s casual.” Brooke Latta

Without a doubt, knowing your client’s case up one side and down the other and understanding and applying the law are critical to your chances of prevailing at trial. But if your demeanor and presentation style lack polish, you might be getting in your own way. Special Counsel to the New York City MTA Inspector General and NITA Program Director Shareema Abel joins May the Record Reflect to talk about courtroom composure, interpersonal conduct, oral advocacy, self-expression, and so much more.Topics3:05 What is courtroom demeanor?6:12 Demeanor in challenging situations8:57 When you know the judge or opposing counsel12:03 Vocal expression and body language16:49 Personal style22:55 Conduct outside the courtroom26:12 Online proceedings28:39 Picking yourself up on an off day32:44 Cross-generational learning at the office37:45 Neurodivergence40:16 Feedback on your courtroom demeanor44:58 Signoff questionsQuote“Silence is one of the things that, over the years, I really had to get comfortable with in a courtroom because I remember wanting to fill every second of space and I thought silence was deadly. But as you grow in your career, you realize that you can use silence as a tool, and so oftentimes, especially when you forget a point, it’s ok to have a pregnant pause or use silence, and then return to a podium, to your notes, to remember what you’re saying. Or using silence to make a point after you ask a rhetorical question and using silence when you’re going from topic to topic, because my theory is you should never be talking and moving at the same time.” Shareema AbelResources Shareema Abel (LinkedIn) NITA Women in Trial (program) Deposition Skills: NYC (program) Building Trial Skills: NYC (program) NITA Women in Trial playlist (Spotify)

NITA Education Director Rhani Lott Choi returns to May the Record Reflect, this time as guest host, to interview trial competition coaches Justin Bernstein and Spencer Pahlke. You may know Justin and Spencer from Unscripted Direct, the trial advocacy podcast for the law school community. Tune in to this blast from your mock trial past to hear about how advocacy skills transfer from law school to law practice to life; the forgotten lessons of mock trial that you should resurrect; and how learning, practicing, and teaching are part of a career-long cycle for the skilled advocate. Timestamps & MoreTopics4:44   Unscripted Direct podcast5:57   Trial advocacy community9:58   Tough conversations about DEI13:11 Building a legal podcast14:48 Intersection of mock trial and trial practice16:41 Three important lessons from mock trial19:03 New practice pointers gleaned from podcasting22:04 Life lessons from mock trial26:01 Former students as colleagues28:10 Things unlearned from mock trial32:12 Why trial skills are important for all lawyers33:30 Misconceptions about mock trial’s value36:47 Keeping skills sharp39:46 Skills transfer42:58 Signoff questionQuote“The biggest challenge the jurors have is they weren’t there when these things happened, so helping them feel like they are there, they’re watching things, even if it’s just through the narration of a lawyer, is incredibly powerful and it sort of sears into their memory.” Justin Bernstein ResourcesJustin Bernstein (bio)Spencer Pahlke (bio)Unscripted Direct (podcast)Episode 5 (Adam Shlahet)Episode 48 (Ben Rubinowitz)Episode 51 (Rhani Lott Choi)AvaTax

You may see depositions as your golden opportunity to preserve testimony, elicit admissions, and test theories—but for your witness, depositions are a veritable stewpot of jangled nerves and apprehension. In this episode, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Christopher Whitten shares what you can do to ensure your witness walks into a deposition feeling at ease with the process and ready to handle even the toughest questions. Judge Whitten reflects on role-playing, using video as a prep tool, broaching difficult topics, responding to objections, and testifying live versus livestream—and that's just for starters. Topics2:35   Confident witnesses   3:53   Is witness prep privileged?5:30   Procedural comfort13:54 Objections during testimony16:06 Substantive prep22:57 Tough questions and role-playing24:36 Using video in prep26:38 Theory and theme testing29:12 Common pitfalls32:04 Testimony via Zoom versus face-to-face38:15 Reluctant witnesses42:36 Expert witness prep46:03 Signoff questionQuote“When you have a problem with the witness, it’s because you didn’t prepare enough.” Hon. Chris Whitten ResourcesHon. Chris Whitten (bio)Building Trial Skills: San Diego (course)The Ins and Outs of Jury Selection (webcast)En Banc: Judges’ Perspectives on Remote Hearings (webcast)“Can I Get a Witness?” (video)

How many of us cue up the “sad trombone” every time we think of doing direct examination? Direct is renowned for being a boring slog through facts and faces as we make on our way to the fireworks of cross and closing. Yet, if you’re not using direct to tell a clear, persuasive story, you’re going to lose your case. According to Judge Amy Hanley and Dennericka Brooks, when you approach direct with the same zest as you do cross, you’ll get the best out of your witnesses, avoid rambling or baffling testimony, and tell the tale jurors are keen to hear. Topics3:42   Why don’t people love doing direct?   6:44   Common mistakes10:49 Telling the story12:18 Organizing your direct14:09 Headnotes16:29 Exhibits, visuals, and demonstratives22:36 Witness prep27:55 Reluctant or difficult witnesses35:00 Bad facts40:57 Demeanor46:00 Redirect49:55 Signoff questionQuote“I will say, first and foremost, that you have to be prepared that no matter how well you prepare a witness, they will get on the stand and say something they weren’t supposed to say, something that will throw you off. It’s just going to happen.” Dennericka Brooks ResourcesHon. Amy Hanley (bio)Dennericka Brooks (bio)NITA Women in Trial (course)The Tense Trio (podcast)Direct Examination: Being the Guide for Your Jury (webcast)Harnessing Your Power on Cross-Examination (webcast)

The profession of trial lawyering has a steep, intense learning curve requiring years of practice (and “practice”) before you begin to feel like you’ve got a grip on it. What if you could shave years off that timeline. NITA’s Education Director Rhani Lott Choi rejoins the podcast to talk about how trial lawyers can compress time through wormholes, slipstreams, and mentorship. Topics5:00   Time compression through wormholes 22:30 And slipstreams29:34 And mentorship34:22 A word about Parkinson’s Law42:28 Signoff QuestionQuote“I’ve worked at places where you have formal mentorship, which can be great, but often that does not continue past the employment relationship. And especially these days people change jobs all the time. The mentorship, for me, at NITA has been so valuable because it transcends that. It’s not based on a job or a connection ... NITA just encompasses everything, through career changes, through types of practice . . . .” Rhani Lott Choi ResourcesRhani Lott Choi (bio)Slipstream Time Hacking: How to Cheat Time, Live More and Enhance Happiness (book)Tomato Clock (Chrome extension)Direct Examinnation: Being the Guide for Your Jury (webcast)

Being a trial lawyer is a challenging job even apart from the actual, technical work of lawyering in the courtroom. Legal advocacy often places emotional burdens upon trial attorneys that can be a lot to manage. Henry Su joins the podcast to dissect the various stressors associated with trial work and offers his insights into managing stress through mindfulness.Topics3:27   Occupational hazards of being a trial lawyer 10:09 Toll of adversarial work14:11 Basic obligations to the client16:13 Managing when conflicted19:33 Role of fear26:07 Mindfulness training30:45 Learning from critiques32:49 Developing distress hardiness37:15 “Goblin mode”39:27 Managing electronic intrusions42:13 Resources on wellnessQuote“You want to create distance. What you also want to do is to avoid is dissonance. Dissonance is when you allow the work that you’re doing to kind of infect you, such that you have internal conflict. You’re torn up about it. You’re torn up about why you’re doing this, and that this is not ‘you’ and that these aren’t the values that you hold dear. You want to avoid dissonance, you want to maintain distance.” Henry Su ResourcesHenry Su (bio)Stress Hardiness and Lawyers (article)Integrating Mindfulness Theory into Trial Advocacy (article)Institute for Well-Being in Law (website)The Anxious Lawyer (book)Motion Skills: Online (April, August)Deposition Skills: Online (November)

Theatre wunderkinds and storytelling specialists Kevin Newbury and Kate Douglas join the podcast to tell stories about telling stories. Kevin and Kate discuss how universal themes, conflicts, and archetypes can be used as formulas for brainstorming; suggest some practices you should borrow from writing for the stage; and reveal which pandemic-era guilty pleasure can actually make you a more engaging storyteller.Topics4:27    Translating events into a story  6:11    Why good storytelling is essential to your trial8:25    Unleashing your creative beast10:49  Summing up with loglines and taglines 12:57  Classic conflicts for framing your client’s case 14:36  Evoking an atmosphere to begin telling a story16:50  Universal story themes 20:26  Nourishing your creativity23:07  Importance of your elevator pitch24:14  Dramaturgy in trial 27:59  How a trial is like a tv show30:10  Defending the unsavory client33:15  New Orleans Trial program40:17  Signoff question Quote“When we come [to NITA programs], it’s always so much fun to sit around the table with these incredible lawyers and judges and hear all of their stories. I love to ask all of them, ‘What’s the wildest, strangest case that you’ve had this year?’ and [with] every single one of them it’s like, ‘Well, that’s a good idea for a tv show,’ ‘Well, that should be a movie,’ and I find that a lot of lawyers and judges are good storytellers when they’re recounting the adventures of something they just went through.” Kevin NewburyResourcesKevin Newbury (bio)Kate Douglas (bio)Deposition Skills & Trial Skills: New Orleans (NITA course) Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind (book)The Seven Basic Plots: Why We Tell Stories (book)Adam Gopnik in The New Yorker (article)The Secrets of Persuasive Legal Storytelling, with David Mann (podcast)Give ‘em the Ol’ Razzle Dazzle, with Dominic Gianna (podcast)

If you’re looking for some resolutions for improving as a trial lawyer, let veteran prosecutor Steve Wood be your guide. In this episode (originally aired in 2021), Steve shares the top ten trial tips that always brought him luck. Any one of these would make for an ideal goal to shoot for in 2023. Steve also talks about public service and his lengthy career in law. 2:58   Tip #15:35   Why law?7:33   Tip #210:46 Recollections of his first trial13:23 Tip #318:23 Favorite part of trial25:19 Tip #427:30 Nerves and anxiety about trial28:49 Tip #533:04 Unwinding after trial34:31 Tip #638:49 Most agonizing career decision41:04 Public service careers45:50 Tip #748:50 A high-profile case I wish I’d tried50:11 Tip #852:43 Tip #954:18 Retirement54:48 Tip #1056:41 Signature signoff questionQuote“Somebody I taught with [at NITA] once said something I thought was brilliant, and it’s this: ‘Time is the measure of importance in the courtroom, whether you want it to be or not.’ And what that means is, we indicate importance by how much time we spend on something.”Recommended ResourcesSteven P. Wood (bio)NITA On-Demand (free resource)America’s Constitution: A Biography (book)So Many Ways to Lose (book)Geddy Lee’s Big Beautiful Book of Bass (book)

Something that concerns trial lawyers more than ever is seating a juror with intractable explicit biases or who believes in conspiracy theories. King County Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Raam Wong experienced this situation when he prosecuted a high-profile, near-fatal shooting of an antifascist protester during a demonstration in Seattle in 2017. Raam joins the podcast to talk about voir dire and deselection tactics, experts and evidence, and checking your own biases at the courtroom door.  Topics5:25     Political violence and Hokoana case9:57     Factors that contributed to mistrial14:38  Juror “tells” during voir dire16:50  Conspiracy theories about a witness20:17  Digging into social media20:30  Questions for deselecting jurors24:36  Willful disregard of evidence, civil versus criminal cases27:30  Addressing juror attitudes32:50  Remedying attention span issues37:50  Believing in or rejecting expert opinion40:50  Concerns about physical safety at trial 45:01  Signoff questionQuote“As trial lawyers, we really have to grapple with [. . .] stereotypes every day in court—the assumptions we have about people and the assumptions that the jury might hold. And at times it can be really effective, as advocates, if our good facts kind of match up, or reinforce, the jury’s preexisting beliefs. But at the same time, as a prosecutor, I’m trying to do justice, and doing justice, in my mind, means ensuring that our courtrooms are open to everyone, and that means not making assumptions about people based on demographics or other characteristics.” Raam Wong ResourcesRaam Wong (bio)State v. Hodgman (case file)Alt-Right Event in Seattle Devolves into Chaos and Violence, Outside, Truth-Twisting Inside (SPLC Hatewatch)Righteous or reckless? Trial under way for couple accused in UW shooting during Milo Yiannopoulos speech (Seattle Times)

This month’s episode features advice and observations from some of NITA’s top judges, who serve as faculty, presenters, and board members. They share their reflections on what they’ve seen from their unique vantage point on the bench and dispense helpful tips for the next time you’re in court. Topics2:13     What counsel should know before setting foot in my courtroom10:30  Most common mistake I see lawyers make in my courtroom17:55  Impressive or memorable things a lawyer has done during trial 22:50  Nuttiest things I’ve seen during jury selectionResources50 Tips for 50 Years, Part 1 and 50 Tips for 50 Years, Part 2Judge Mark Drummond (podcast) (webcast) (webcast)Justice Lee Edmon (bio)Judge Marian Gaston (bio) (webcast)Judge Nancy Gertner (bio) (podcast) (webcast) Judge Amy Hanley (bio) (podcast) (podcast) (webcast) (webcast) (webcast)Judge Ruth Rocker McMillan (bio) (podcast)Judge Sam Sheldon (bio) (webcast)Judge Mindy Solomon (bio) (webcast)Judge Christopher Whitten (bio) (webcast) (webcast)

Imposter syndrome is a common phenomenon among lawyers, often starting in law school, where self-doubt about your spot among so many wunderkinds can shake your sense of achievement and belonging. Gwinnett County Magistrate Court Judge Ruth Rocker McMullin joins the podcast to discuss what imposter syndrome looks like when it shows up in lawyers’ lives, how she got out of her own way as her legal career pivoted into new directions, what happens at the intersection of imposter syndrome and implicit bias, and how cultivating emotional intelligence just might save you from yourself. Topics3:50     Imposter syndrome  5:52    Places, spaces of imposter syndrome in law8:56     Are lawyers more susceptible? 10:37  What imposter syndrome looks like15:39  Implicit bias and imposter syndrome20:32  “Glue work” 26:20  Managing implicit bias upwards, sideways27:16  Calling out implicit bias, letting it slide29:18  Upside of imposter syndrome  31:21  Managing your own brain33:00  Exploring emotional intelligence 34:38  Developing emotional intelligence38:58  Signoff questionQuote“I had to have that conversation with myself when I switched my career from being a public defender to going into private practice, to taking a part-time judicial position. You know: ‘I don’t know if I’m qualified to do this.” I had to tell myself, ‘You handled death penalty cases. Of course you can do this.’” Judge Ruth Rocker McMillan ResourcesJudge Ruth Rocker McMillan (bio)The Imposter Phenomenon (article)Being Glue (article)

The spontaneity of cross-examination and impeachment often intimidates lawyers early in their trial career. NITA Education Director Rhani Lott Choi and Denver trial lawyer Kate Sandlin have been there, done that — and in this episode, they disclose their favorite tips that honed their skills and settled their nerves. Rhani and Kate talk about how to feel at ease in the moment, advance-prep for the “spontaneity” of cross and impeachment, bring wily witnesses to heel, use demonstratives to pin down an answer, and help your witness be ready to take the stand.Topics3:05     Cross-examination: what is it good for?  5:55    How to plan for cross8:23     Thoughts on your judge12:28  Learning about your judge14:47  Single-fact, leading questions21:09  Demonstration of crossing a bad witness27:16  Crossing an alleged crime victim32:03  Using demonstrative exhibits  34:22  Witness preparation39:14  Impeachment: what is it good for? 41:50  Dangers of impeachment45:34  Demonstration of impeachment51:16  One best cross tip53:50  Signoff question Quote“Every mistake I’ve made on cross-examination, if I ever go back and look at it, the problems start with my question, and I probably wouldn’t have made that mistake if I’d asked a better question.” Rhani Lott Choi ResourcesRhani Lott Choi (bio)Kate Sandlin (bio)Building Trial Skills: San Diego (course)Show AND Tell: Using Exhibits Effectively in In-Person and Remote Advocacy (free webcast)