Secrets of Defendant's Strategy
Confusion = Win
It is easy to understand the threshold for what we, as the Plaintiff, need to do to win: show the jury that the credible evidence in the case favors, even slightly, the truth of our position. Sure, the Defendant can win if it discovers credible evidence that shows that our position is not true, but that is only one way it wins. The easier way is simply to try to confuse three people on a jury of twelve. Confusing is much easier than convincing.
As a result, in almost every case, the Defendant will avalanche the jury, often during their closing for the first time, with questions, arguments, and unrelated points in an attempt to create the impression of, gosh, I guess there are lots of issues that the Plaintiff didn't really explain. If the Defendant confuses three of the jurors, justice is denied.
You're a Single Father?
If you've read the "Just Insurance" entry in the Secrets by Law section, then you already know that our suits are designed to secure only the insurance money, even if that is not enough to rectify the injury.
Nevertheless, you'll see that in most every case, the Defense Attorney will ask questions and say things that are designed to mislead the jury into incorrectly thinking that a full judgment would take food out of the mouths of the Defendant's children. "You're a single father, aren't you?" And "Yours is just a small, 15-person company, in a small town?"