It has been said that if you can imagine it you can understand it. As a lawyer, it is your role to help each juror "see" or imagine the case based on your arguments, not your opponent's. This article explains the importance of communicating with visuals in the courtroom, and its effectiveness on modern juries.

As we move further into the 21st century, visual language is increasingly dominating our channels of communication. We need only trace the progression of advertising to observe this phenomenon—from the often entirely text-based ads of the early 20 th century to current advertising practices that are reliant on images with little, if any, text at all. We could also compare the text-heavy content of the Internet in its infancy during the early 1990s to Web sites today, rife with imagery while keeping text to a minimum and reducing font size considerably compared to earlier years.

Because of this growing trend, visual communication is shaping our cognitive processes, our imagination and our judgments. Whether we are looking at imagery in a magazine ad, on TV, or on the computer screen, the powerful effect of visuals is changing the way we communicate, interpret information and make decisions about the world around us. Thus, the importance of communicating with visuals in the courtroom, and its effectiveness on modern juries, can no longer be ignored or misunderstood by trial attorneys.

As with many developments involving the use of technology, the legal world tends to be a little slower in embracing this movement towards visual communication. Some judges are reluctant to admit the use of projected graphics in the courtroom, while many attorneys may find their use suspect or superfluous, even an extravagance. However, considering the findings of a study conducted by the Wharton School of Business which compares visual plus verbal presentations to strictly verbal presentations, attorneys and judges may want to reconsider those opinions.

According to the study, presentations using visual language act as an aid in the decision making process. Visual communication helps to explain and clarify a concept or situation, enhancing what's being communicated verbally and emphasizing the important point(s). And if an individual is able to understand a process, situation or transaction and its relevance more clearly, it's going to be easier for that person to make a confident decision about that process, situation or transaction.

In addition to being better informed, the study notes that audiences find that presenters who use visuals are more effective and make a better impression. By using visuals, presenters, such as trial attorneys, can explain and truly educate an audience on a complicated concept. And by being able to create and speak to a visual representation of the concept, the attorney thus gives the impression that he or she has a comprehensive understanding of the matter and comes across as an authority on that matter. Moreover, attorneys who make an effort to educate their jury are viewed as helpful presenters who respect and have confidence in their audience's ability to grasp complex concepts.

What is of the greatest significance to trial attorneys, particularly prosecuting or plaintiff attorneys is that the study found that the use of visual communication promotes group consensus. By using visuals to organize, clarify and emphasize key information and its relevance to the case, attorneys can actually help each and every member of the group to process and structure information in the same way and can even shape their interpretation and perception of the evidence. The entire jury is looking at the same visuals, and this is particularly helpful when a jury goes to deliberate. Because now, at the very least, they are all using the same language and same organizing structure(s) to discuss and think about the case, thereby allowing jurors to more clearly communicate to each other about the information that's been presented to them. And better communication will quite often lead to shorter deliberation time.

We can see how visual communication can accomplish the conclusions set forth by this study by looking at an example of graphics used in the courtroom. In the recent U.S. v. Jeffrey K. Skilling and Kenneth L. Lay case, I worked with the trial team to create visual elements to help the jury understand the complexities of this trial and arrive at the verdict confidently. One of the objectives in creating the visual presentation was to help the trial team establish the themes of this case. For example, we wanted to communicate to the jurors that there was a consistent disparity between the troubled and fraudulent state of Enron's business units inside the walls of Enron, compared with the "everything's fine" image Lay and Skilling projected outside the walls of Enron to its investing public. As is often the case in white collar litigation, the high-ranking executives' defense was that they were not aware of troubles or fraudulent activity. It was the government's case that these two defendants were well aware of such activity, and that Skilling and Lay chose to mislead the public by misrepresenting to the outside world the troubled financial transactions taking place inside of Enron. To show this, we created a series of standard comparative graphics which were projected onto a screen in the courtroom. The screen is divided in two with a vertical line running down the middle of the graphic—one side comparing information to the other side—to highlight the differences between the information on each side. For this particular case, we labeled the left half of the graphic with the word "Inside" in a red bar across the bottom. On the right half, the word "Outside" was placed in a blue bar across the bottom of the screen. On the "Inside" portion of the graphic, we displayed a document, which had been presented to Ken Lay detailing the major problems EES, a business unit of Enron, was experiencing in 2001. On the "Outside" half of the graphic, we inserted a quote taken directly from Lay's address to the employees/investors at an All-Employee Meeting, during which he told them that EES was doing well and gave no indication of the problems he was aware of that were listed on the document.

This graphic alone was helpful to the jury in several ways. First, by comparing these two pieces of evidence side by side, we showed a clear dichotomy between what the defendants knew, and what the defendants divulged to the public. In this way, the graphic provided a context for the evidence, which would help the jury understand the relevance of the documents and testimony being presented.

In addition, by using such a graphic during opening statement, we established early on the framework for the rest of the trial, an outline of the story the trial team would tell as the case progressed, i.e. Skilling and Lay knowingly misrepresented the financial condition of Enron to investors. We continued to use this type of graphic as a template to give context to other pieces of evidence. Thus, as more evidence was introduced to the trial, the trial team was able to reinforce and reiterate to the jury the recurrence of their theme as well as show a clear pattern of contradiction in statements made by the defendants. Thus, the graphic provided an organizing structure to the jury for the information and evidence that was to come. The jurors would begin to separate in their minds which pieces of evidence belong on which side of the dividing line. And as such, this simple graphic begins to shape how the entire jury will interpret evidence as it is introduced to them throughout the rest of the trial. And come deliberation, the jurors will be using the same organizing structure, the same visual tool and logic, to consider the evidence, which will allow them to discuss and make decisions about the case as a group. Keep in mind, however, that you don't want to go overboard with using the same graphic series over and over—the jury may feel like they are getting hit over the head with the concept. Simple variations on the design or using elements of the template in other graphics will help accomplish the same goal.

This graphic also served to guide the jury to the significant points of the case by identifying the key documents and the significant portions of testimony. This is especially important in a case such as this one in which hundreds of documents were entered into evidence over a 4-1/2 month period of time. And because the jury both hears and sees these key points, they will be able to recall them much more easily than if they were only expressed verbally.

And finally, this graphic, by creating an organizing structure and establishing a theme of this case, developed a consistency in the trial team's story and presentation of facts. Such consistency lends a strong sense of credibility to the team's arguments. For the thematic thread that runs through the verbal presentation of facts is bolstered by the themes running through the graphics, creating a stronger, more coherent story and an unwavering argument.

It sounds simple, and it is. In fact, the point of using graphics in the courtroom is to simplify your case and to help ensure the evidence is unmistakably understood so as to aid the decision making process of the jury. As the example shows, graphics can be an effective rhetorical tool for your argument. We saw that even one graphic can accomplish several objectives in the presentation of your case to a jury. For in its ability to establish theme, patterns of behavior and point to the key documents in the case, the graphic undoubtedly helped the jury to understand the case and relevance of evidence more clearly. Furthermore, by creating a consistent organizing structure for the jury, the graphic helped the trial team recount a credible, coherent story. And finally, this graphic acted as a tool to facilitate the jury's discussions during deliberation, as its structuring of the evidence provided all of them the same point of reference with which to discuss the case.

Visual communication in the courtroom is not only an effective way to communicate, but the expected way to communicate. Because of the ubiquitous manifestation of imagery in our society, modern jurors have come to anticipate the use of visuals as a means of handling and interpreting information. Thus using graphics in the courtroom is not an extravagance, but has become a necessity. We owe it to modern juries, and to our clients, to communicate in a language that will help the jury understand more clearly the terms of our arguments so that they can make well-informed and confident decisions in support of our case.