Most trial attorneys fall into one of two traps when they speak: they either get stuck in repetitive vocal patterns that lull jurors to sleep… or they avoid rhythm altogether and lose clarity. In this episode, Kristi unpacks the neuroscience and strategy behind rhythm as a communication tool — how to use repetition, contrast, and deliberate pattern to make your message stick in jurors’ minds long after closing arguments.

Listen here...

In this episode, you’ll learn:

1. Why predictable vocal patterns sabotage juror attention.

2. The difference between distracting repetition and intentional rhythm.

3. How Parallel Structure and Juxtaposition give your argument clarity and musicality.

4. The power of the Rule of Three to build momentum and land your point.

5. How to Ring the Bell with a repeatable phrase jurors carry into deliberations.

6. Why rhythm activates both emotion and logic for deeper juror connection.

Key Takeaway:

A pattern grabs attention. A break in the pattern keeps it.

Rhythm is the architecture of a message that sticks.

Favorite Moment:

“Our brains are pattern-seeking. When they can predict where you’re going next, they relax. That’s why you have to avoid prolonged patterns — not to keep jurors guessing, but to keep them engaged.”

Links & Resources:

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

Want more?

👉 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/

If you loved this episode, leave a quick review or send it to a colleague who wants to sharpen their courtroom rhythm.

For more resources to help you use your voice — and your rhythm — with clarity and confidence, subscribe to Foster Your Voice Podcast with Kristi Foster.

TRANSCRIPT:

Hellloooo! Hello Foster Fam. Welcome back, I'm glad you're here and we get to spend this time together. Be sure to leave a 5-star rating and review for the podcast, and if you haven't yet, get on my weekly newsletter distribution. Not only do I preview what each week's podcast is about, but I give lots of other free resources to help you on your communication growth journey, and share some of life in a segment called FosterThoughts. Being on my email list is a great way for us to stay connected. Go to fostervoicestudio.com/contact. The link is also in the shownotes.

Speaking of sharing from my life, I want to tell you a story about something that happened a few years ago. I'll do my best to get through without laughing too much, but it's something that has been cracking me up to the point of tears for these last several years and I won't soon forget it.

But ALSO, it serves as a great lesson for you as a trial attorney. So...storytime with Kristi...

I have known my friend Cheryl and her husband Tim for about 11 years. I met Tim first when I was introduced to CrossFit and he was my workout buddy. I eventually met Cheryl and we had a more connection together as we were both on a weightloss and health journey. But we also mostly had an online friendship. We live in the same town but as busy, professional women, we just didn't get together in person much. And, you know how it is as an adult trying to make new friends and being intentional.

So, it really delighted me when I learned that Cheryl was a foodie. I'm a novice foodie I would say, but I really wanted to try new places and I was seeing Cheryl post about pop up restaurants and visiting chefs to Portland, so I reached out and asked if she would be willing to include me the next time she was gonna attend a food event and she warmly said yes!

It wasn't too long after I wriggled my way into her dining group that she sent me a FB message with a graphic that said "Take a trip down to Crescent City," with the note: Megan, Tim & I are thinking about attending this event....might you want to join us?

I couldn't picture in my mind where Crescent City was, maybe at the Oregon beach, or...i wasn't sure, so I looked it up and saw that it was in Northern California. Now, like I said, I was really eager to ingrain myself with this new-formed foodie group and was really wanting to create & nurture my adult friendships, so i was always going to say yes, but needed to get more information given that this was now, in my mind going to be an extended overnight trip for the first time with these friends.

So, here's how the text convo went:

Me: So, what is the travel plan? I’m definitely interested.

Cheryl: We could swing by the pick you up for sure

Me: Would we go down that morning and stay overnight?

Cheryl: We usually come back after dinner. Tim will work that day so we’d be heading down around 5:30pm.

Now, I was excited for this potential road trip and, actually felt pretty honored that they would include me in this adventure. But, at the time, I was almost 50 years old and WAY past wanting to pull an all-nighter. I DID have the next day off work, so I suppose I could make it work, but...gah! How miserable to be up all night, in a car.

The texting continued:

Me: So…wait…i’m a little confused. Crescent City is in CA right? 6.5 hour drive down and back after a 6pm dinner?

Cheryl

Its at Mestizo on 29th & Division in Portland. 15 minutes from here.

Now, Cheryl knows that I love doing staycations, so it made perfect sense to her that I was considering making a day of it. Going to explore the city in the morning, then staying over in SE Portland and wondering if they wanted to do the same.

As I'm starting to put all this together, I'm dying of laughter.

Me: I was ALL KINDS of confused. The ad said “take a trip down to Crescent City” so I thought we were road tripping down. Hahaha!

Cheryl: Nah, the chef Bonnie is from NOLA but she's here in Portland now.

Me: Oh man! I’m cracking up.

So, what I didn't know, the critical piece of information, was that "Crescent City" is a term of endearment and nickname for New Orleans, so this chef was visiting Portland and doing a pop-up dining experience of crab étoufée, gumbo, muffaletta sandwiches, etc.

But this is SO LIKE what can happen with jurors. In this scenario, you're Cheryl. You have all the information. It all makes perfect sense to you. All systems are firing and you don't even realize that you're alone in this communication road trip.

I'm the jury here. You say something that, might very well be common knowledge, but it isn't to ME. Suddenly, I'm spiraling, trying to make sense of it all, working hard to grab at context clues to piece together meaning. My brain is working SO MUCH harder than yours just to keep up.

This is why, and I can't stress this enough, why it's SO IMPORTANT that you use common, everyday language so that EVERYONE can be on the same journey. And you might be surprised at the words and references that seem totally normal to you but that leave your jury on the outs.

I really want you to get my free cheat sheet called Top 20 Legal Terms to Avoid (And What to Say Instead). I want to help everyone take the same road trip! You can get it at fostervoicestudio.com/top20, or just click the link in the shownotes.

Thanks for letting me tell that story and laugh about it all over again. Sadly, my friend Cheryl passed away suddenly, just a few days ago, so i share it with all the love in my heart for our enduring friendship, our foodie adventures, our mutual support, and thinking of her family an all she impacted during this season of disbelief and deep sorrow. Rest in peace, Cheryl. You were loved, and you are missed.

—BREAK—

So, one of my MAJOR pet peeves when it comes to communication is PATTERNS. I've talked about this before, especially on my social media posts so be sure to follow me at @fostervoicestudio to make sure you're getting all my daily tips and strategies.

But patterns just might be one of your biggest saboteurs when it comes to helping jurors hear your key points and differentiate them from everything else you say. When you get stuck in a pattern—and I mean, melodically you're trapped in always ending at the same (up) pitch, or when all of your phrases are about the same length and they all end down on the same note, or when you are stuck in one pitch registration and never pop out of it. Those are patterns.—when you're stuck in a pattern, it just becomes physically impossible to deeply hear and internalize your content.

So, I will preach til the cows come home about how important it is to disrupt patterns.

Now, having said that, when you are STRATEGIC about it, there is something powerful about a deliberate pattern in your speech, like a repeated phrase (sometimes called "ringing the bell"—the same phrase repeated exactly the same way, like a theme or hook), or a parallel structure. Using a RHYTHMIC pattern for these instances can make your words easier for jurors to remember.

Think about memorable speeches, sermons, or even protest chants. What makes them stick? Rhythm. Repetition. Intentional pattern.

When jurors hear something with a rhythmic pulse, their brains recognize it as meaningful — as something to hold onto. It gives their working memory a hook to grab.

Our brains are pattern-seeking. They are on the lookout for predictability. When it can predict where you're going next, it can relax. This is EXACTLY why, generally, you have to avoid prolonged patterns. you don't want your jurors' brains lulled away from focused attention. You want to keep tantalizing their ears and helping them stay active.

But when you use RHYTHM, a short-term use of a pattern can really be effective. Not enough to make you predictable (and boring), but enough to help it stick.

A pattern grabs attention. A break in the pattern keeps it.

There are a few types of speaking conventions that really lend themselves to sticky rhythmic repetition.

Parallel Structure

The same grammatical pattern, repeated for emphasis and for helping memory.

Examples:

1. “They had the time. They had the tools. They just didn’t take the care.”

2. “It wasn’t bad luck—it was bad judgment.”

3. “He saw the danger. He ignored the danger. He caused the harm.”

Can you hear how this creates some musical flow while also establishing your authority?

Each phrase lands like a steady drumbeat — reinforcing the logic, and giving jurors a simple, repeatable rhythm to carry into deliberations.

“They had the time. They had the tools. They just didn’t take the care.”

Juxtaposition

Pairing opposites to sharpen contrast and clarify meaning.

Using this convention can really creates emotional charge and logical punch, especially when you pair it with varied pitch, one of our 5 vocal building blocks: pitch. So, the first is up, the second is down

Examples:

1. “It wasn’t an accident; it was a choice.”

2. “He wasn’t tired; he was dangerous.”

3. “They charted numbers but missed the patient.”

You can also play with word pacing within your rhythmic cadence to further draw out contrasted meaning. Lean into the juxtaposed words.

1. “This wasn’t hidden danger—it was ignored danger.”

Juxtaposition activates both hemispheres of the brain — logic and emotion — helping jurors process complexity more deeply.

Rule of Three

You might already be familiar with this rhythmic convention. It's about listing ideas in threes to build the rhythm and then land it with finality.

Humans love triads. Three-part lists create rhythm, flow, and a sense of completion.

Examples:

1. “They saw it. They ignored it. Someone got hurt.”

2. “Choice after choice after choice led right here.”

3. “See it. Say it. Stop it. That’s safety.”

It can be a little sing-songy, but it DOES create something memorable and it give some closure; really lands the point.

“Ringing the Bell”

I mentioned this one before. It's a repetitive phrase that brings the truth home—clear, simple. Just like the dig of a bell. It's a rhythmic phrase that you return to several times through your presentation; repeat the exact same phrase — word for word, tone for tone — at key points throughout. It's the thing you want as an earworm when the jury goes into deliberations. It's the phrase they quote to each other. That's why it has to be said exactly the same every single time.

Examples:

1. “When you break the rules, people break.”

2. “They took an oath, and they broke it.”

3. “If they cared, they would fix it.

Ring the bell.

Mirror Phrasing

Repetition with a twist or a turn of phrase that reveals insight or contrast. It's similar to parallel and juxtaposition in that way, but maybe a bit more sophisticated and has potential for deeper connection.

Examples:

1. “Not just WHAT happened—but WHY it happened.”

2. “The danger wasn’t unseen—it was unaddressed.”

3. “It’s not about blame—it’s about responsibility.”

Mirror Phrasing helps jurors connect emotionally and intellectually. It’s rhythm plus revelation — a one-two punch of cognition and feeling.

Rhythm isn’t just for music—it’s a secret weapon in public speaking and courtroom communication. When you intentionally build rhythm into your speech, you make your message easier to follow, easier to retain, and far more persuasive. (see...? that was rule of three, right there)

Just remember:

1. Too much pattern = predictability and disengagement.

2. Too little pattern = confusion and disorganization.

3. The sweet spot = deliberate rhythm that creates connection, clarity, and impact.

So start playing with rhythm this week.

Practice varying your pitch, pace, and emphasis. Find moments where repetition reinforces your message — and others where breaking the pattern keeps your listeners alert.

Because when your rhythm works, your message sticks. (there's a little parallel structure for you)

Until next time, keep fostering your voice.