A witness’s performance can influence how jurors interpret evidence, assess credibility, and ultimately decide a case, making effective witness preparation essential. Even the strongest facts can lose impact if testimony is unclear, defensive, or difficult to follow. DOAR’s witness testing and preparation services are built on decades of behavioral insight and trial experience, helping witnesses communicate with confidence, authenticity, and clarity.
We evaluate how witness testimony is perceived, identify what strengthens or weakens credibility, and provide targeted guidance that improves both delivery and comprehension. Our approach ensures that every witness—from key fact witnesses to highly technical experts—supports the trial narrative, reinforces core themes, and connects with the factfinder in meaningful and persuasive ways.
Mock jurors, judges, or arbitrators observe direct and cross-examinations to evaluate a witness’s clarity, credibility, demeanor, and response to pressure. This testing identifies communication gaps and helps determine whether a witness strengthens the case or requires further development or shouldn't testify at all.
We coach trial witnesses in demeanor, pacing, clarity, courtroom presence, and the effective use of exhibits, ensuring they communicate confidently and withstand challenging questioning in depositions or at trial.
Expert witnesses must simplify complex concepts without sacrificing precision. We help them refine language, structure testimony, and anticipate cross-examination, enabling them to present their case clearly and persuasively. We also develop effective visual strategies to assist experts' presentation of complex concepts.
The South Carolina Supreme Court's decision to overturn Alex Murdaugh's murder convictions has reignited questions about juror impartiality, outside influence, and the safeguards courts use to ensure a fair trial. DOAR Director Chad Lackey, Ph.D. explains what the reversal means for attorneys, how juror bias is identified and addressed, and why a multi-faceted approach to jury selection remains critical in today's highly connected world.
DOAR supported Empery Asset Management and Brio Capital in a Section 16(b) defense verdict involving Kartoon Studios.
A federal jury returned a sweeping victory in favor of former bank executive Patrick Byrne in his dispute against Ameris Bank.
Five-year analysis finds gender, socioeconomic status, and perceived case strength shape how jurors evaluate liability.
DOAR Director Ellen Brickman, Ph.D., shares her perspective on how jurors may respond to emotionally charged AI cases, the challenges companies face in defending these claims, and why conversational AI may be viewed differently than other forms of technology.
National survey highlights strong support for AI safety guardrails and reveals generational differences in attitudes toward chatbot accountability.
Drawing on years of psycho-legal research and real-world courtroom experience, Dr. Gordon examines what the Luigi Mangione case reveals about modern jurors—from the influence of pretrial publicity and pop-culture narratives to the ways emotion, bias, and broader societal mistrust shape verdicts inside the jury room.
This marks a new chapter for DOAR, reinforcing its role as the proven experts in litigation strategy for leading lawyers involved in complex, bet-the-company litigation.