Self-study
P1
"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.
P2
████████ ██ █████████ ████████ ███ ████████ ██████ ███ █████████████ ██ ████████ ███████ ██ ██████ ███████ ███████ █████████ █████████ █████ ██████████ ████ █████████ ████
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.
P3
████████ ████████ ███████ ███ ████ ███████ ███ ██████ ███ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ██ ███ ███ █████ ███ ████████ ███ █████████████ ████ ██ ███████████ █████████ ████ ██ ███ █████ ██████ ██ ███████████ ████████ ████████████ ████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ █████████ ████ ████ ███ ████████ ███████████ ███ ██ ██████ ███████████ ███████ ███ █████ █████████ ████ ██████ ███████████ █████ █ █████ ███ ███████ █████ ██ ████████ █████ ████████ █████████ ███ █████ ████ ███ █████████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ███ █████ ████████ ███████ ██ █████ █████ ██████████ ████████ ██ ███ █████ ████████████ ███
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
9.
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ ███ ████ █████ ██ ███ ████████
a
Although there are ██████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████ ████████ ███ █████████████ ██ ██████ ██████ ███ ████ ████████████ ███████ ████████ █████████ ██ █████████████ ███ █████ █████████
The author never suggests that research has shown the effectiveness of stealing thunder in “actual” trials. In fact, “no empirical research has directly tested the effectiveness of stealing thunder in actual trials.”
b
The commonly practiced █████████ ████████ ██ ████████ ███████ ███ ████ ██████████ ████████████ ██ ███ ███████ █████ ██ ██ ███ ██████████ ███████ ███████ ██████████
This doesn’t capture the author’s belief that there’s reason to think stealing thunder is effective.
c
Lawyers' commonly held ██████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ████████ ███████ ██ █████████ ██ ███████ █████████████ ████████████ ██ ███ ████ ████████ ███ █████████ ███████
This best captures the main point as explained above. Even if you think it’s leaving out the point regarding potential limitations in the last paragraph, there’s no better answer.
d
The risks involved ██ ████████ ███████ ███ ████████ ███ ████████ ████████ ████ ███ ███████████ ██ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ███████ █████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ███████
This doesn’t capture the author’s belief that there’s reason to think stealing thunder is effective.
e
Research designed to ███████ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ████████ ██████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ █████████ ███ ███ ██████████ ███ ███████ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██████████████
There’s no evidence that any of the research discussed was “designed to confirm the usefulness of stealing thunder.” In addition, the author never suggests that research has justified the belief stealing thunder is valuable; that’s too strong for the author’s opinion. The author believes there is support for its value; this doesn’t mean the author thinks it’s correct to believe that it has value.