Today, we're diving into a trial skill that's always tested but rarely taught: how to speak both fluent legalese and fluent human. In this episode, we talk about why mastering both languages—and knowing when to switch between them—is one of the most overlooked courtroom leadership tools.

If you want to connect with jurors, clarify your message for witnesses, and lead the room with clarity and credibility, this conversation is a must.

LISTEN HERE...

In this episode, you’ll learn:

1. Why being too good at legal language can actually backfire in front of a jury

2. The difference between speaking to the Court vs. speaking to the People—and how to do both skillfully

3. What happens when jurors hit cognitive overload (and how to avoid losing them)

4. How to translate complex legal concepts into language your jury can remember and repeat

5. The vocal and physical shifts that help build trust with your audience in real time

Key Takeaway:

If you want to be remembered in deliberation, your words need to live on without you. Speak in language that jurors can understand, repeat, and use to advocate on your client’s behalf.

Favorite Moment:

“When you say, ‘The defense failed to uphold the requisite duty of care,’ they hear: ‘blah, blah blah.’ But if you say, ‘He didn’t do what he was supposed to do—and that’s what hurt her,’ they get it. That’s the shift.”

Links & Resources:

1. 🎁 Download the FREE PDF: The Top 20 Legal Terms to Avoid (and what to say instead) — https://www.fostervoicestudio.com/top20

2. 🎧 Related Episode: Episode #23 – How to Balance Logic and Emotion in Trial

3. 📕 Jon Acuff Soundtracks: https://jonacuff.com/books/

Want more?

👉 Get weekly tips and techniques delivered to your inbox. Subscribe to "The Foster Files" Newsletter: https://www.fostervoicestudio.com/contact

👉 Follow me online for behind-the-scenes voice tips, mindset shifts, and strategies to help you lead with your voice in and out of court:

1. IG: https://www.instagram.com/fostervoicestudio

2. FB: https://www.facebook.com/fostervoicestudio

3. LI: https://www.linkedin/in/fosterthought

4. Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/fostervoicestudio/

And don't forget: Subscribe to Foster Your Voice Podcast and leave a quick review if this episode helped reframe your approach to courtroom communication. Every review helps the show grow and reach more high-performing trial lawyers like you.

TRANSCRIPT:

Hellloooo! Hello Foster Fam! Whoo! I hope you are enjoying your summer and making the most of outdoor opportunities. I personally don't LOVE the sun, which, for the rainy Pacific NW, I feel a little guilty about. We don't get very many long stretches of sun so it feels like I should really lean in, but...I'm a tender little flower and i just wilt on these warmer days. BUT...summer time DOES hold the joy of some outdoor activities as long as I time them correctly. haha! Hopefully that's the same for you and you're fighting off the humidity and the mosquitos in your area with success.

We are now well into the back 6 of the year, so it's a good time to check in with your goals and see if you're still on track. I know it's good for me to just take stock occasionally and re-assess from time to time.

Some goals or intentions that I set at the start of the year turned out to be irrelevant; just didn't seem important once I got going into the activities of my year. Others I'm doing okay with, but...to be honest, there are a few that i'm like "What in the WORLD? I'm no where NEAR where I want to be."

So, it's a good time to revisit one of my favorite "soundtracks"—a mantra, of sorts, or just a catchy phrase to play on repeat for good mental resets and reminders. This one is from one of my favorite authors, Jon Acuff..."I am the CEO of my actions, not the CEO of my outcomes."

For me, that means that, instead of looking at the RESULT that I'm hoping to accomplish, it's time to look at what i'm DOING to move closer to that desired result. I mean, now that I"m saying it out loud, I know it sound kind of like "duh, that's clear, Kristi." But honestly...it's really easy to hyper-fixate on the outcome and to call THAT my goal. But my goal really is rooted in the ACTIONS i'm taking.

So, say for instance, you might have set a goal of wanting to lose 10lbs. But that CAN'T be a goal. That's an OUTCOME. The true goal is in the actions you take to get to that outcome. So, the goal might be to leave a few bites behind at every meal. Another goal is do 30 minutes of body movement per day. Those are the things you actually have CONTROL over. Losing 10lbs will be a happy outcome, but you're not truly in control of that. "I am the CEO of my actions, not my outcomes."

—BREAK—

Today, we’re talking about a courtroom skill that’s rarely taught, but always tested. And that’s your ability to be… bilingual. Not Spanish and English—but legalese and plainspoken, human-centered communication.

If you want to win over jurors, connect with witnesses, and lead the courtroom confidently, you have to master the art of speaking so they get it.

Let’s start with a truth that might sting a little:

You’re too good at your job.

You’ve trained for years to speak fluent "Court." You are a legal linguist.

1. You use phrases like “the burden hasn’t shifted,” “prejudicial outweighs probative,” and “goes to bias” with total confidence—because this is your native courtroom tongue.

2. You can turn phrases like “summary judgment is inappropriate at this stage” or “the record is devoid of evidence” into complete thoughts without giving it a second thought.

3. You’ve trained your brain to think in arguments, structure, and case law.

And you are VERY good.

Being able to do what you do requires mastery of court language. You did the right thing by dedicating yourself to this skill. It's remarkable!

But the people deciding your case? They don’t speak that language. Never in my entire life have I had a conversation that incorporated the phrase "goes to bias" or "devoid of evidence." Regular, every day people don't speak like that.

You’ve got to be bilingual—speaking the language of the Court AND equally speaking the language of the People. And no one ever taught you how to code switch.

Let’s take a closer look at this issue.

In any given courtroom, you’re moving between two distinct audiences:

1. The legal world—judges, opposing counsel, expert witnesses.

2. The human world—jurors, lay witnesses, even your own client.

Each audience requires a different style of communication.

And a lot of attorneys don’t realize they’re code-switching… or worse, they don’t code-switch at all.

They speak in fluent Court all day long, and then wonder why the jury looks confused, disconnected, or bored.

Here's the hard truth:

If you only speak fluent legalese, your jurors are going to miss the point.

And if they miss the point?

They’re going to fill in the gaps with emotion, guesswork, or they're going to listen more to whoever has the most confident voice in the deliberation room.

And that voice won’t be YOURS, because you're not in that room.

And let's not limit this JUST to the jury. You need to make sure your deponents understand you clearly too. One of my clients said in our coaching session when we were debriefing a recent deposition that they sometimes felt like the witness was answering a totally different question than what they asked.

Of course there are several reasons why this would be the case, but don't you want to be SURE that it's not because YOU lacked linguistic clarity?

Here’s what we know from the research:

The human brain has a limited capacity for processing new information—especially when under stress or fatigue. And courtroom environment creates both stress and fatigue.

Your jurors aren’t stupid. But they are under a cognitive load.

They’re taking in unfamiliar terminology, new names, evidence, emotional stories, legal standards, and procedural instructions, in a formal and stuffy environment—all while navigating their own internal reactions and group dynamics.

That’s a LOT.

So what does the brain do when it hits overload?

It starts filtering. It tunes out language it doesn’t understand.

It clings to what feels simple, familiar, and emotionally resonant.

And that’s your opportunity.

You’ve got to be the voice that cuts through the noise.

Not by dumbing things down—but by making ideas stick.

That means clear structure, concrete words, and yes—speaking like a real human.

Not a case caption. Not a deposition transcript. Not a law review article.

Think about your jury. They didn’t go to law school. They don’t spend their days arguing motions or writing briefs. They’re high school teachers, truck drivers, office administrators, parents, retail workers, retired folks.

And they are smart.

But they’re not fluent in your dialect.

So when you say “the defense failed to uphold the requisite duty of care,” they hear:

(beat)

“…what?”

Now, you say that same idea as:

“He didn’t do what he was supposed to do—and that’s what hurt her.”

Suddenly, they get it. They can repeat it.

They can use it when they walk into deliberation.

That’s your goal: to give them language they can carry with them.

Because once they leave the courtroom, you’re not there anymore.

You don’t get to clarify. You don’t get to explain again.

Your words have to live in that room—without you.

Now here’s where the real finesse comes in:

You don't really get to choose between formal and informal communication. You’re toggling back and forth—often in the same sentence.

Let’s say you’re questioning an expert witness. You need precision. Formal terms. Exactitude.

But then you pivot to the jury to recap or explain.

That’s when you shift gears. That’s when your language softens, shortens, simplifies. That’s when your tone changes too.

This shift isn’t just verbal—it’s vocal.

It’s pace, it’s rhythm, it’s where you pause. It’s where you look.

When you address the judge, you stand tall, you’re efficient, you’re direct.

When you turn to the jury, your voice warms. You offer clarity. You make space for them to catch up, track with you, and trust you.

Because that is what builds rapport.

That’s what builds permission.

And ultimately, that’s what builds a verdict.

So how do you develop this bilingual muscle?

You get aware first.

Start noticing:

1. When are you speaking to the judge… but your voice still sounds like you’re in voir dire?

2. When are you speaking to the jury… but your words still sound like the law review?

3. Where are the spots in your opening or closing where a juror might mentally drop out?

Then start rewriting.

Not to simplify your argument, but to amplify your clarity.

Use metaphor. Use short sentences. Use the power of repetition. Use imagery.

Say it like you’d explain it to your cousin over coffee.

Because if she can understand it—and repeat it—you’ve won.

And here’s something else to remember:

Emotion is a memory enhancer.

If you can anchor your facts to human emotion—whether that’s fear, injustice, hope, or grief—the brain holds onto it longer.

That’s why storytelling matters. That’s why tone matters.

And that’s why cold, sterile legalese—on its own—will never win hearts or minds.

Go back and listen to Episode #23 about how to balance logic AND emotion.

You’re not just a legal strategist.

You help the jury learn—then lead—on your client’s behalf.

So here’s the takeaway:

You need to be fluent in both worlds.

The courtroom requires formality.

But the jury needs humanity.

You’re not choosing one or the other. You’re switching strategically based on context, audience, and purpose.

Because ultimately, the jury can’t take you into deliberation with them.

But they can carry a sticky phrase.

They can remember the way you made them feel.

And they can speak your client’s truth in language that compels and advocates on their behalf.

So keep doing the good work.

Keep learning the language of people. DOWNLOAD MY FREE LIST OF "The Top 20 Legal Terms to Avoid." The link is in the show notes. Start there.

And as always…

Keep fostering your voice. 💛