« Obama :: The First Mac President? | Main | Google Makes Voice and Video Chats Available to Everyone in Gmail »

November 12, 2008

Comments

David Meagher

Thought you would be interested in note-link.com and the technology we are brinign to the courtroom

Chuck Peterson

Just how often we actually use "technology" during trial depends on both the case and the user. I have used Trial Director in a very complex case, and did so without the help of an assistant. The jury told me afterwards that it was very helpful. However, Trial Director takes time to learn and load. Even though I am a Mac guy I must admit that there is no real alternative to Trial Director on the Mac side - and yes, I have tried TrialSmart but found it was not a good alternative. I have also used Keynote and PowerPoint and think those are so user friendly that any lawyer should be able to go it alone. Still - in the end every trial is about the story and sometimes technology gets in the way. I still like a really big white pad and marker. "Now, Mr. Witness - help me create a list of reasons why you might stretch the truth here. My first thought was to avoid prison ... ("AVOID PRISON" on the white pad)." No technology required - just write it down and move on. The jury will remember the list that you created with them. You can do this in Keynote too! Story. Story, and story! And simplicity. If technology is not that simple it will likely hinder, not help.

Jim F

I used TrialSmart in a case last month and won a 2.3 million dollar verdict in Oklahoma.

If you are looking to an easy way to slap up exhibits and video and don't want the bells and whistles use TrialSmart.

We didn't like TrialDirector. Too cumbersome.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Newsvine Technology News

Blog powered by Typepad