![Transcription Center logo](/themes/custom/tc_theme/assets/image/logo.png)
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
LOGGER'S S SI-FP-1986-CT-219 LOGGER: Valerie McGhee REEL NUMBER: 2AB STAGE: Am. Trial Lawyers DATE: 7/3/86 PRESENTOR: Germaine Ingram GROUP NAME: REGION/STYLE: Closing Arguement Amerifun Case PERFORMER(S) INSTRUMENT/OCCUPATION William Wilson Plaintiff Lawyer Diana Marshall Defense Lawyer Jim Carrigan Presiding Judge CONTENTS 1. Intro to Freeman vs. Amerifun Case - background on case [[strikethrough]] and [[/strikethrough]] Ingram 2. Discussion on the importance of closing arguments - Ingram 3. Discourse on closing arguments - personal statement - Wilson 4. Closing Arguments - summation of facts - Wilson 5. Expression of his responsibility and Nature of the closing arguments - Wilson 6. Discussion of sympathy vs. justice as basis for decision [[strikethrough]] Wilson [[/strikethrough]] of jurors- Wilson 7. Review of the damages sought by Freeman - Wilson 8. Placing responsibility of sending a message to Amerifun on jurors - Wilson 9. Lack of justification of the sympathy argument - Marshall 10. Reminding jurors of the childs history of swallowing items - Marshall 11. Pointing out lack of direct evidence supporting plaintiff arguments - Marshall 12. Review of the plaintiff's responsibilities and alternatives available to her at the time - Marshall 13. → Rebuttal of plaintiff's lawyer - Wilson 14. Debriefing of plaintiff's lawyer on his tactics - Wilson 15. Defense lawyer explains tactic [[strikethrough]] s [[/strikethrough]] of emphasizing liability -Marshall 16. Explanation of apportioning responsibility - Ingram → 18. Reel change → 17. Judge discusses jury perceptiveness - Carrigan