We help you understand the outliers, the wild cards and the advocates
We Help Identify Risky Jurors
who could end up energizing a vote against your client.
A Typical Scenario
Translate juror responses into juror rankings
Through proven statistical techniques, JuryMapping can identify and quantify biases ahead of time that may not be apparent during voir dire.
To help you gain an understanding of your potential jury pool and frame the landscape, prior to your case, we conduct surveys of hundreds of potential jurors in selected districts, gathering critical data. We then analyze the data to identify the most effective voir dire questions, as well as providing a simple Juror Ranking Tool that quickly assesses risky jurors.
We build a sophisticated algorithm from hundreds of surveys about your case and put it at your fingertips during trial.
Simply enter a juror’s response into your phone, tablet or laptop, and we will instantly generate a “risk score” on that juror (i.e., the statistical likelihood that someone giving those responses will find biased against your client).
How analytics can support your current process
There are many parts of voir dire that will always require a lawyer’s skill and intuition. How you position a question, and how you present yourself and your client to the jury can have an enormous impact on shaping jurors’ views. Similarly, a juror’s behavior as they listen to and answer questions can provide important insight into how they feel about your case, and how they will interact with other jurors.
However, there are parts of voir dire that are better managed with a statistical approach. Our analytical tool allows us to determine complex relationships between different pieces of information. By making it simple to record a juror’s responses and understand how those answers translate to bias in seconds, our platform gives you information about your jurors and provides an objective second opinion about who might be a risk.
The value of combining responses
You may arrive prepared with fantastic voir dire questions, however combining a jurors’ responses and ranking each juror against his or her peers can still be challenging. Most either rely on a “deal-breaker” question, where a certain answer is grounds for a strike, or on a tally system, where the attorney counts the number of “good” and “bad” answers a juror gives.
However, relying exclusively on “deal-breaker” questions misses out on a huge opportunity to incorporate information that can significantly change the likelihood that a juror will be receptive to your case. While a tally approach allows for more nuance, it ignores the fact that some questions are more informative than others.