About this episode

This episode explores the differences in how jurors and lawyers interpret evidence in court.

Send us Fan Mail Trial teams often walk into court with evidence that feels airtight. The documents line up. The timeline makes sense. The experts support the theory. But once the jury room door closes, that certainty can fall apart. Jurors do not process evidence the way lawyers do. They interpret it through story, emotion, and their own experiences. In this episode, we discuss: The litigation intelligence gap and why lawyers and jurors often see the same evidence very differentlyWhy evidenc...

More episodes of Science of Justice

• Why Strong Cases Bleed Value Early · April 20, 2026 · 27 min
• The Hidden Risk in “Strong” Cases · April 4, 2026 · 47 min
• Invisible Injuries, Visible Justice: Transforming Brain Injury Litigation · March 9, 2026 · 27 min
• What Lawyers Miss When They Skip the Science · February 27, 2026 · 33 min
• Why Good Cases Still Lose · February 21, 2026 · 32 min
• Measure The Story Or Lose The Verdict · February 9, 2026 · 39 min

Explore listener stats, chart rankings, contacts and more on the Science of Justice podcast page.