PT142.S3.P2.Q12 > Analytics

Hide analysis

"Stealing thunder" is a courtroom strategy that consists in a lawyer's revealing negative information about a client before that information is revealed or elicited by an opposing lawyer. █████ █████ ██ ██ █████ ██ █████████ █ ████████ ████ ██ ███████ ██ █████ █████████ ██ ████ █████ ███ ██ █████████ ██ █████ ████ ███████ ███████ ████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ██████ ██ ██ ████████ ██ ████████ ██████████ ██ ██████ ██ ████████████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ██████████ █████ ██ ████ █████████

Intro topic · Stealing thunder

Revealing negative information about one's own client in the courtroom before that information is revealed by the opponent. Many lawyers think this is a good idea if the opponent is likely to reveal the info.

Support for effectiveness · Studies suggest stealing thunder is effective

Studies involve simulated trial situations, not actual trials.

Main point · Effectiveness is also supported by psychological explanations

Explanation 1 · Volunteering negative info can help credibility

Explanation 2 · Causes juries to critically evaluate what opponents will present

█████ ███ █████ ██████ ██ █ ██████████ ███████ ██ ████████ ████ ████ ███ █████ ██████ ██ ███ ██████████ ███ ███████ ███ ██████████ ███ ████ ████████ ██ ███ █ ██████████ ███████ ████ ████ ████████ ██ █████ ███ █████████████ ██ ███ ██████ ████ ██ ██ ████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████ █ █████ ██ ████████ ███████ ██ ████ ███ ███████████ ███ ███ ████████ ██ ████ ███████ ██ ███████ ███ ██ ████ ██ ████ █████████████████ ████ ██████ █████ ██████ ████ ████████ ██ ██ ██████████ ████████████ ██ ██████ █████ ████ ██████ ████ ██ ██ ███ ████ ████████ ████ ██ ███████ ██████████

Explanation 3 · Info revealed multiple times (by both plaintiff and defense) can carry less weight

It's already "old news" by the time the defense brings it up again.

████████ ████████ ███████ ███ ████ ███████ ███ ██████ ███ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ██ ███ ███ █████ ███ ████████ ███ █████████████ ████ ██ ███████████ █████████ ████ ██ ███ █████ ██████ ██ ███████████ ████████ ████████████ ████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ █████████ ████ ████ ███ ████████ ███████████ ███ ██ ██████ ███████████ ███████ ███ █████ █████████ ████ ██████ ███████████ █████ █ █████ ███ ███████ █████ ██ ████████ █████ ████████ █████████ ███ █████ ████ ███ █████████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ███ █████ ████████ ███████ ██ █████ █████ ██████████ ████████ ██ ███ █████ ████████████ ███

Explanation 4 · Allows lawyer to spin the negative info in a positive way

Jurors will use the early positive framing to guide their later analysis of what comes up in trial.

Potential limit · Stealing thunder might not work when info is extremely negative

The very negative info can create a negative framing for jurors, which they'll apply to what comes up in trial.

Passage Style

Single position

12.

The author discusses the " █████████ ██████████ ████ ██████ ██████ ██████ ████████ ██ ███ ████████ █████████ ██

Question Type

Purpose in context (of word, phrase, or idea)

Structure

The author discusses the “cognitive framework” to identify a factor that can influence the effectiveness of stealing thunder. Early positive framing can help guide the juror’s assessment of later information. But early negative framing can also influence a juror’s assessment in a that doesn’t help a lawyer’s client.

indicate that at █████ ████ ███████████ █████████ █████ ██ █ █████ ███ █████████ ███ ███ ██████ ████████ ███████████ █████████ █████ ██ ███ █████

This best captures the purpose as explained above.

91%

indicate that jurors █████ ████ █████ ████ ████ ███████ █████████ ███ ██████ ████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ██████ █████ ████████ ██████ ██████

The author doesn’t indicate that jurors bring attitudes and biases into court. We know that they usually want to solidify their position regarding a case, but this doesn’t imply that they come into the case with any attitudes or biases. Also, the “cognitive framework” doesn’t relate to attitudes/biases jurors bring in from outside court.

suggest that damaging ████████ ████ ██ ██████ ██████████ █████ ██ █ █████ ████ ████ █ ███████ ██████ ████ ████████ ████████ █████████ █████ ██ █ █████

The author never suggests damaging evidence framed positively earlier will have more impact than damaging evidence presented later.

theorize that stealing ███████ ██ ████ ████ ██ █████ ██ ████████ ██ █ █████ ██████ ███ ██████████ ███ ██ ███████████ ██ ████████ ███████ ████████

The author never suggests that stealing thunder is best done as early as possible. Although it makes sense to think that this is a reasonable approach, the author never makes this point. So it can’t be the purpose of mentioning the “cognitive framework.”

speculate that creating ███████████ ██ ████ █████ ██ ████████ ████ █████████ ████ ██████████ ███████ ████ ███████ ███████████

The author never suggests that creating credibility is more effective than positive framing of negative information in some cases.

PrepTest 142 - Section 3 - Passage 2 - Question 12

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action