Opening Statement Lectures at the Academy and at the Economics University

Today I lectured on the opening statement at both the Academy of Advocates and at the National Economic University. One of my objectives was to emphasize what I thought were three significant oversights which occurred in the majority of last week's closing argument presentations. In most (but not all) of the presentations I did not see, (1) a clearly stated theme of the case, (2) a real focus on the elements of the crime, and (3) a proper sequence of storytelling. Since it is important that these three weaknesses be cured to properly present an opening statement, I spent some time talking about each. As to the third weakness--that of improper sequence--most of the presenters simply told a chronological story, beginning at the first fact (regardless of its weight or even of its potential damage to the theory) and then proceeding fact by fact through a rigid timeline.

As I was leaving the apartment this morning, I had this inspiration: that is, that the sequence of facts in a case is much like a hand being dealt in a card game. We have no choice over the sequence of cards we are dealt, but we most assuredly have control over which cards we play first. It further occurred to me that in a deck of cards we have two colors--red and black--as well as cards of varying value. With this inspiration in mind, I quickly found an underground kiosk selling cards, bought a deck, and proceeded to class. This spur of the moment inspiration provided a most compelling lecture example, which I think will be memorable to these young law students. When I got to the point in the lecture where I discussed sequence of facts in the storytelling process, I first had a card-saavy student come up and shuffle the deck. I then dealt out a long line of random cards, representing the chronological sequence of events. I explained that red cards would be those favorable to the prosecution, and black favorable to the defense. I then proceeded with a mock opening statement for the defense in chronological order, covering damaging facts whenever a red card was next in the sequence. It was quickly--and visually--evident to the students that you start with your most favorable facts, regardless of the sequence. I also demonstrated, using the cards, how an advocate must explain all of the acts (and how improper it would be to try to hide certain cards behind your back), and how one can cluster circumstantial evidence to bolster a case, etc. This little device turned out to be endlessly useful in my lecture, and seemed to be a real learning focal point for the students. Such are the pedagogical inspirations of the moment.

Now a comment on these two classes. I view some of the strongest and most promising students to be enrolled in these two schools--the Academy and the Economics University. I have seen more preparation and focus overall from these two institutions, although there are brilliant individual students in the other three law schools. That being said, the students in the Economics University (pictured here today) attend more consistently, and are better prepared as a group than any other school. In discussing this phenomenon with Olga, she also pointed out that the Economics University students begin their classwork earlier in the morning, which makes their dedication all the more impressive. She credits much of the dedication and excitement to their fine criminal law professor, Olexandra Yanovska, who has also been a marvelous support to the guest lecturers from America.