What do you think?
Rate this book
Trial Techniques
Newly revised, this leading book in the field shows how to prepare for a jury trial and reviews the thought processes of a lawyer before and during each aspect of a trial. Structured to follow the stages of a trial, Trial Techniques continues to deliver practical advice and abundant examples of the courtroom skills needed to present evidence and arguments persuasively. This comprehensive yet concise handbook covers all aspects of the trial process, providing the perfect source for your elective course.
This long-time leading course book is an invaluable source for prospective trial lawyers, a best-selling author renowned for his skills both as a writer and litigator, a clear, engaging writing style that breaks the trial process down into its critical components for more thorough and efficient comprehension excellent examples illustrating strategies for opening statements, jury selection, direct- and cross-examination, exhibits, objections, and more an appendix containing the Federal Rules of Evidence for easy reference.
This long-time leading course book is an invaluable source for prospective trial lawyers, a best-selling author renowned for his skills both as a writer and litigator, a clear, engaging writing style that breaks the trial process down into its critical components for more thorough and efficient comprehension excellent examples illustrating strategies for opening statements, jury selection, direct- and cross-examination, exhibits, objections, and more an appendix containing the Federal Rules of Evidence for easy reference.
500 pages, Paperback
First published December 31, 1995
4 people are currently reading
220 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
July 24, 2013
Necessary for trial prep. The intro on cross examination nearly scared the suit off of me.
July 7, 2020
A must read for any one who will ever try a case. It should be a required text for all trial practitioners.
I revisit it before every trial. It’s a great instruction manual for trial prep and performance, answering all of your practical questions from the most simple and basic matters (like the introduction of exhibits) to the more substantial matters like theme development and preparation of witnesses and witness examinations. The illustrative examples of transcripts are worth reading and simply and effectively show you how it’s done, what questions to ask, and in what order.
I revisit it before every trial. It’s a great instruction manual for trial prep and performance, answering all of your practical questions from the most simple and basic matters (like the introduction of exhibits) to the more substantial matters like theme development and preparation of witnesses and witness examinations. The illustrative examples of transcripts are worth reading and simply and effectively show you how it’s done, what questions to ask, and in what order.
October 19, 2019
Essential (though somewhat basic) book for a courtroom litigator.
May 23, 2013
I couldn't tell you if this book will make you a better trial lawyer, since I'm not in practice. The text itself is plainly wrong at points, but these points have little bearing on conducting a trial itself. It's just that it's quite lazy to get terminology wrong:
"Most people are also deductive, not inductive, reasoners. That is, they are impulsive, use a few basic facts to reach decisions, and then, accept, reject, or distort other information to fit their already determined conclusions." (p43)
The point of these sentences is to point out, hey, some jurors will decide on the basis of their own biases rather than the evidence that comes out at trial. That's not wrong. But it is wrong to call this deductive reasoning. I can't for the life of me figure out why the author felt the need to use this term. Deductive reasoning is usually an argument where, if you accept the premises, and the conclusion logically follows from those premises, you must accept the argument. "Impulse" or information distortion has absolutely nothing to do with it!
And since this came so early in the book, I had a hard time taking the rest of the text seriously. It's a competent enough text, I suppose. Most of the work at trial is simply... practice, practice, practice, and be sure to write everything down.
"Most people are also deductive, not inductive, reasoners. That is, they are impulsive, use a few basic facts to reach decisions, and then, accept, reject, or distort other information to fit their already determined conclusions." (p43)
The point of these sentences is to point out, hey, some jurors will decide on the basis of their own biases rather than the evidence that comes out at trial. That's not wrong. But it is wrong to call this deductive reasoning. I can't for the life of me figure out why the author felt the need to use this term. Deductive reasoning is usually an argument where, if you accept the premises, and the conclusion logically follows from those premises, you must accept the argument. "Impulse" or information distortion has absolutely nothing to do with it!
And since this came so early in the book, I had a hard time taking the rest of the text seriously. It's a competent enough text, I suppose. Most of the work at trial is simply... practice, practice, practice, and be sure to write everything down.
January 12, 2009
I've been doing trials for over thirty years, and I still find this useful. I regularly tell people that it's better to put in evidence the way the judge expects it than to be creative with things like evidentiary foundations. Mauet gives you the script to establish what you need to get the evidence in. A fundamental and essential resource.
May 31, 2008
Many trial lawyers' bible, but many of the things he says are obvious and much of the rest isn't terribly useful. There is some good food for thought, and it is probably helpful to those generally uncomfortable in front of others.
September 2, 2012
One of the most influential advocacy books I've ever read. Originally read this is college then reviewed it again in law school. Mauet's approach to jury trials is easy to follow and great for honing one's style and technique.
April 9, 2007
Pretty good reference for trial techniques - opening and closing, direct and cross, prepping a witness, etc.
December 15, 2011
Wonderful reference for any young trial lawyer or law student.
October 13, 2013
"Really liked it" isn't exactly right, but as a survival handbook, I really needed it, so 4 stars it is.
October 19, 2009
Read this the weekend before my first jury trial. Totally worth it. :)
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews