Voir Dire Bank
Tommy Vaughn: Mark O'Mara Self-Defense Chart
Mark O'Mara Self-Defense BRD Chart
Valerie Hedlund: Self Defense Voir Dire
Valerie Hedlund's Self Defense Voir Dire PowerPoint
Robert B. Hirschhorn, J.D.: Tips for Getting Your Favorable Jurors Talkin’ and Your Unfavorable Jurors Walkin’
Robert B. Hirschhorn Voir Dire Paper
Burdens of Proof Charts—Really Good Ones
Mark Bennett's chart
Michael Mowla's chart
Susan Schoon's chart
Butch Bradt's chart
Voir Dire PowerPoint Slideshows
Mark Thiessen:
Isaacks PowerPoint slides
Sestoso (blood) PowerPoint slides | Blood
Bitner (under .08) PowerPoint slides | Under .08
Cox (Unlawful Restraint) PowerPoint slides | Unlawful Restraint
Dudley (blood) (candida) PowerPoint slides | Blood Candida
Head (operating and intox) PowerPoint slides | Operating and Intox.
Johnson (DWI w CHILD) PowerPoint slides | DWI w/ Child
Rosales-Chaplin (Intox Assault) PowerPoint slides | Intox. Assault
Rue (SFSTs) PowerPoint slides
Neal (9000) PowerPoint slides
Olsen (HEA blood) PowerPoint slides
Ryan Gertz: Murder
Murder PowerPoint
Appellant Briefs
Brief of Appellees - File Stamped
Appellant's Brief
Voir Dire Puzzles & PowerPoints
Voir Dire Picture of Sig Saucer
Voir Dire Gun Puzzle
Voir Dire Counter-ADA Slides
VD Pictures
Defense's Gun Puzzle
Charles Birdsall | Murder - Self Defense
Murder - Self Defense PPT
Thomas Mayr's Countering Misleading Tactic by DA
See the attached jpegs (drag to your desktop to use). It looks like "JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS" with the bottom half covered up. I ask jurors to recall how the prosecutor showed the puzzle with the missing pieces or the picture of FDR. I then ask them to recall why the prosecutor showed them that: to try and convince them that it's ok to not have "all the facts" in order to convict. I then remove the bottom half covered up to reveal that what it really says is "IUMRING TQ GQNGIUSIQNS." I then ask, "Do you see the problem with jumping to conclusions?" and then will sometimes follow that up with something about how innocent people get wrongly convicted because a prosecutor gets a jury to just "jump to a conclusion." The point is that the jurors need to demand all of the facts from the State.
