Opportunity to testify in court provides a civics lesson

Commentary >> Will Wood

Recently I had the opportunity to serve as an expert witness in a court case. You may be thinking, “What the heck are you an expert at?” and that’s probably a fair question. I only write about it every once in a while, but I am a real estate appraiser and broker with more than 40,000 hours of experience plus uncounted hours of education. With that much time invested in it, even I am bound to pick up a few things.

I have prepared appraisals for somewhere around 100 legal cases, but I have only had to testify in court five or six times. In this case, the attorney who hired me wanted me on hand for all of the testimony, so I joined the proceedings right after jury selection.

The judge entered the courtroom before the jury and invited the attorneys to go through an unsettled list of pre-trial items. Questions were asked, rulings were made or promised, outstanding objections noted.

Seeing the attorneys in this setting, without a jury present, was revealing. There is a certain amount of theatrics to trying a case before a jury. No, it’s not like Hollywood’s version of courtroom drama, but trial attorneys know a bit about bluff and bluster. Without the jury present, they were polite, direct, and steeped in the language of law.

There are a lot of jokes about how often attorneys lie, but as advocates — while they are not allowed to lie— they are expected to make the best case. Even if they know their client is guilty, the attorney’s duty is to provide the best defense available. So the attorney’s job is to downplay evidence that hurts their client’s case, call into question witness testimony when it is unhelpful and provide evidence that supports alternative theories.

This is an occasional source of tension between attorneys and appraisers. Appraisers may not advocate. We are bound by law to be neutral, disinterested, and unmotivated by how our estimated value might help or hurt our clients. Attorneys have a hard time understanding this, and appraisers have a hard time understanding why their attorney clients ask for a “high” number or a “low” number. We are trained to give the right number.

Throughout the three days in court, I studied procedure. There were a lot of objections. There were dozens of sidebar conferences. There were times when the jury was asked to leave, and the attorneys would talk openly with the judge. There was a lot of standing and sitting.

The case evolved in fits and starts, with small gains and losses over the phrasing of a question. Attorneys were trying to gauge the changing mood of the jury during testimony. At times, a few pages of evidence were presented. One counselor was building a case brick by brick while the other tried to disassemble it.

There were no “a-ha!” moments like you would see on TV or the big screen. There were no rousing speeches. There were no verbal traps. No over-the-top courtroom flair.

But it was riveting to watch. I came away with an increased respect for our legal system. The work attorneys put in on behalf of their clients is huge.Judges put in long hours listening to cases, trying to thread the needle to ensure both parties can have a fair hearing. then there were the solemn and mysterious roles of the other officers of the court. And the jurors themselves, spending hours upon hours focused on someone else’s problem.

What we have is not a perfect system, but I cannot think of a better way to sort out our legal differences. Even having been to a few proceedings where I was not a witness, on top of having testified myself, it was an immersive lesson in civics. Maybe when I’m retired, I’ll skip the matinee and take in some court cases.

Will Wood is a small business owner, veteran, and half-decent runner. He lives, works, and writes in West Chester.