Skip to main content

Dress code for the courtroom.


Last year I blogged on professional etiquette in the courtroom. I wanted to follow-up on that post and talk some about appearance in the courtroom. The old adage goes on to say that you never have a second chance to make a first impression. I would like to modify that by saying you never get a second chance to undo a continuing bad impression. Unfortunately, I have seen over the years some very questionable attire during a trial. I would like to preface this posting by saying I do not hold my self-out to be an image consultant. Rather just a silent observer who has been left scratching his head on occasion.

First, I would like to touch specifically on our most important visual aid, our witnesses. Their clothing not need be expensive, but it should not appear worn, stained, or the wrong size. Instead it should fit well and not have the appearance that it was slept in, e.g. wrinkled tremendously. Often the appearance of a witness can completely sabotage their credibility on the stand. It is very important that a case team manage the presentation of their witness from both a testimony standpoint and their attire. You may have the greatest expert in the world but it will do you no good if the jury is fixated on their outlandish attire.

Years ago, I was involved in a case where an expert showed up to testify dressed in a blazer and t-shirt. Not only was his chest hair showing but also was the Mr. T starter kit of gold chains. What possible good opinion was the jury to cultivate from this visual presentation? On the surface he looked like he was not taking his role to testify very seriously. Furthermore, his expensive fee was confirmed by all the jewelry he was proudly displaying. I find it hard to imagine that some of the jurors did not make the same assumptions that I did.

Another awkward appearance situation I have seen involves over dressing a witness. This is a judgment call and every case is obviously different. Others may have a better experience with this but I have never seen it work correctly in my fifteen years. For example, last year I was involved in a case where a truck driver was wearing a suit during his testimony. Not only did he seem obviously uncomfortable wearing the costume but also it did not fit him properly. Worse was another case where the plaintiff had on a blazer with the price tag still on the back of his sleeve. It was there all through the morning session and chuckled at on various occasions by jurors.

By far the worst was the witness who had his pant cuffs held up by staples. This was a clear indication that his suit and accompanying accouterments were purchased the morning of trial. Nothing helps credibility more then new designer staple slacks! Trust me when I say the jurors are very aware of all these attire oddities. They have nothing to do but sit in a box for hours to observe and listen. These are not first impressions but rather potentially ongoing and damaging impressions. Do you want your witness to be remembered as the person with staples in his pants during deliberations?

Another witness fashion fopaux is the use of large amounts of makeup. According to the makeup expert in my house (my wife) female witnesses should be using neutral lipstick and very basic foundations. Everything should blend and enhance their features and not stand out dramatically. I was once involved in a trial where our expert was using so much makeup I think a putty knife would have been required to remove it. She was wearing a white lab coat which just amplified the attention of the rainbow of colors decorating her face. I can only imagine the jurors wondering if this was a doctor or a circus clown on the stand to testify.

In addition, we need to be cognizant that our witnesses are not projecting an image that is enticing for the wrong reasons. There is nothing wrong with being attractive but flaunting it to the point where credibility is ruined is a bad thing. Cases are not won with a nice pair of biceps or the shapely legs of a witness. Dressing conservatively makes fewer distractions for the jurors who need to be concentrating on questions and answers.

Finally, all these basic attire rules apply to legal professionals working on the big stage called a jury trial. Being competent and well educated does not matter if you look ridiculous. The jury will have the potential to be an unforgiving audience if they want too. Therefore, do not give them anything negative to latch onto from day one. They WILL talk about you. Having a case team and witnesses in neutral, natural and professional attire is the beginning of a correct visual presentation.

Popular posts from this blog

Analogies and the courtroom.

"One good analogy is worth three hours discussion." - Dudley Field Malone Over the years I have seen so many complicated concepts vanish into the nether void of the courtroom. Moreover uncomplicated concepts or facts which became bogged down in lawyer speak. One of my jobs as a trial consultant is to assist with breaking down these concepts and facts. The end result is to use visual communication as a tool to help a jury absorb and understand this information.  One of the biggest tools in assisting with this goal is a good analogy. An analogy is defined as non-identical comparisons between two things, with a resulting similar explanatory effect. The best case teams I have worked with over the years have mastered the use of analogy in their presentations. This has been a constant tool and point of interest in my professional career. One of the first things I do when I join a trial team is read all the expert reports. This gives me an instant foundation of the case to...

Video Deposition Tips.

The witness is a doctor who had surgery duties today and he or she is exhausted. Opposing counsel prepped them while you waited in the lobby with the court reporter for what seemed like an eternity. Finally, the videographer walks out to the lobby to verify the equipment is setup and the prep session is over. You sit patiently and wonder if the sound of your stomach rumbling with hunger pains will be captured by the microphone. What else could go wrong? Unfortunately, in a video deposition much more. My big break in the litigation support industry was about 15 years ago. I took what I thought was a summer job as a legal videographer. Little did I know what was about to happen in terms of my career path. I only lay that foundation because even now so many years later little has changed with video depositions. OK, sure now we have better technology but the basic underlying mistakes made are the same. So I just thought I would share a few tips and observations here on my blog. There a...

Technology and the Chewbacca defense.

Over the years, I have been asked by several case teams about the dangers of using tech in the courtroom. Most of these inquiries were founded in the belief that technology may be too slick. Or perhaps the jury may infer the client has a tremendous amount of resources to spend on the case. Of course, ten years ago those were valid concerns, but not in our current age of increasingly tech savvy jurors. However, there are also still many pockets of resistance amongst the general populace. Therefore, we must consider the ramifications of letting the technology overwhelm the audience. Interestingly enough, I am not referring to the technology you may use in your own presentation. Instead, those tools which are employed by your adversary. In my experience, there has been a very subtle increase in the use of technology to confuse the jury. The presentation could be an overcomplicated graph, animation, or demonstrative of some type. These examples are almost always supported by the tech/la...