This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
Book Review: Anatomy of a Trial by Paul Mark Sandler, Esq. Eric N. Stravitz

As a trial advocacy instructor, I relished the chance

to review Mr. Sandler’s new book, Anatomy of a Trial (“Anatomy”) for Trial Reporter. Te book did not disappoint. What most distinguishes it from similar books is the thread that weaves the book together: United States v. Rosen. Mr. Sandler defended Rosen at trial from allegations that he purposely underreported donations connected with a lavish fundraiser for Hillary Clinton’s 2000 Senatorial campaign. Many trial advocacy books use anecdotes to provide “teachable moments,” yet few provide the sweeping perspective and readability of this book. Further, few trial advocacy books contain the writing of

more than one author. Anatomy richly benefits from the wisdom of four distinguished trial judges. Te judges cement Mr. Sandler’s teachings and add valuable lessons of their own. Te book’s relative brevity combined with the authors’ discipline has produced a work that distills the presentations to essential information. Mr. Sandler’s

discussion of the timeless concepts of

ethos, pathos, and logos is useful for anyone who seeks to persuade. Most instructors who write about the technique of refreshing a witness’s recollection do so in the context of direct examination. On page 114, Mr. Sandler discusses using it during the cross-examination of witness whom you do not want to discredit. It is a valuable technique. My quibbles with the book are few. Mr. Sandler uses the

old saw “the evidence will show” in his chapter on opening statements. I prefer “we will prove,” “we will show,” or, better still, storytelling that makes such words unnecessary. Mr. Sandler cautions the reader to mind the concept of “primacy” by stating that “people remember best what they hear first.” I have found that it isn’t what people hear first that matters, but rather the first thing that resonates with them. On page 172, Mr. Sandler tells the jury that he will “review…the salient materials of evidence superimposed by the instructions that the judge has given.” Mr. Sandler must have had a well- educated jury to use such language. On page 154, readers are referred to a bibliography of advocacy teaching tools. I was disappointed to find it absent from the book. Moreover, I found reading the transcripts from the trial somewhat tedious, particularly since earlier in the book the authors ably distilled the key lessons to be gleaned from them. In the prosecutor’s closing argument, he used “we submit…” so often that I stopped counting at the tenth time. I have heard many lawyers argue similarly to both juries and judges. Is it an effective way of making a point without telling the fact-finder(s) what to think or ill-advised legalistic blather? I would have liked for Mr. Sandler to address this. At the end of each semester I give my trial advocacy students a bibliography of resources. Tis book will be on the next one. It is also, however, a worthwhile read for

50 Trial Reporter / Summer 2009

experienced trial lawyers who try cases intermittently. For those who haven’t the time to read the entire book but seek an efficient refresher course, the “Learning Points” at the end of each chapter will prove useful. Lastly, I would be remiss if I failed to mention that, at a mere $25 through MICPEL, it is quite a bargain.

Biography Eric N. Stravitz is a partner at the Washington, D.C. law

firm Mesirow & Stravitz, PLLC, where he handles personal injury and medical malpractice lawsuits and trials in federal and state-level courts across the region. A member of the District of Columbia and Maryland Bars, Mr. Stravitz handles Virginia cases pro hac vice. He teaches Trial Advocacy as an Adjunct Professor at Te George Washington University Law School. Mr. Stravitz is a member of TLA-DC, MAJ, and AAJ. He has served as a member of MAJ’s Trial Reporter Editorial Board since 2000.

He also moderated an AAJ

teleseminar. Mr. Stravitz graduated magna cum laude from the State University of New York at Albany in 1988, and graduated from Te George Washington University School of Law in 1991.

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68