Witness Preparation and Traffic Lights: Don't let witnesses get trapped by their own words
- Jeff Dougherty, M.S.
- Apr 9
- 4 min read
What does green mean when you come to a traffic light? Go, right? It seems like the obvious answer; but nope, green does not mean go. Huh?
Why doesn't green mean go and what do traffic lights and witness preparation have to do with one another anyway? Keep reading to find out.
Why is it a problem to say that green means go when you come to a traffic light? In everyday conversation it's not a problem but in litigation it's a big problem. In a normal (non-litigation) conversation, if someone asks if green means go, they're probably not trying to trap you with your own words. So, it's OK to be a little casual with our response because with very few exceptions, when you get a green light, you go. However, when it comes to testifying in court or in a deposition, agreeing that green means go is a big problem. That's because when you're under oath and you agree to questions from opposing counsel by saying "yes," that means "yes" always and forever, and in every circumstance. It's absolute. And once you've said "yes" to something that opposing counsel proposes to you, that yes will be turned around and used against you to the detriment of your credibility and to the case.
It might be evident now that you've thought about it, why, if you're asked under oath if green means go, you wouldn't answer "yes." If not, lets pull back a bit and really consider the question in context. Is it always true that when you get a green light you go? If I can think of one exception, then the answer is no. Here's one: What if you're at a stoplight, and you're first in the lineup of cars waiting to go. The light turns green, but you notice that a child hasn't quite made it across the intersection. Do you go? Obviously not. Now that I've mentioned it, I'm sure you can think of many exceptions.
As it applies to litigation, it gets more complicated. A savvy lawyer isn't just going to start with "You'd agree with me that green means go, right?" It could happen that way, but typically the questioning lawyer will gently lead the witness into the trap through a series of questions that employ two powerful psychological principles: Behavioral Momentum and the Priming Effect (specifically "conceptual priming").
Behavioral Momentum - causing a person to perform an action repeatedly, which increases the subsequent likelihood of that same action. In this case the goal is to make the witness answer "yes" repeatedly by asking a bunch of factually true questions.
Priming Effect - causing a person to think about a certain concept, which increases the likelihood of that person's subsequent answers in line with the desired concept.
In the Green Light example below, it's easy to identify these two psychological principles in action:
Q. Mr. Jones, you have a driver's license, correct?
A. Yes
Q. And one of the key requirements to get your license was to learn the traffic laws and pass a written test, right?
A. Yes
Q. This is required by the State, isn't it?
A. Yes
Q. Part of the traffic laws have to do with traffic lights, right?
A. Yes
Q. You understand that the traffic lights are placed at intersections for a reason, right?
A. Yes
Q. You know that traffic lights use certain colors that have certain meanings, right?
A. Yes
Q. And those colors help control the intersections so people can navigate them safely, right?
A. Yes
Q. What are the colors?
A. Typically they're Red, Yellow and Green.
Q. And you were taught, probably way before you took driver's training what those colors mean, weren't you?
A. Yes
Q. Based on your life's experiences, your driver's training and all the years you've spent driving, you'd agree with me that when you come to an intersection, Green means "Go," right?
A. Yes
If you're a lawyer who prepares witnesses to testify, I'm sure you can think of cases in which your own witnesses have fallen for the trap outlined above, and agreed to things they shouldn't have. So, what can be done to help witnesses avoid falling prey to this strategy and get manipulated by opposing counsel?
One (among many) of the key concepts that will help in this regard is to teach witnesses that before they answer any question from opposing counsel, they must ask themselves, "is there an exception - no matter how small - to what this lawyer is asking me to agree with?" If there is, the answer cannot be "yes."
So, what's the actual answer to the question, “Does green mean go?” It's going to be something like the following:
Not necessarily
It depends
That's not how I think about it
That's not how I was taught
In general, but not always
No
There are many reasons these answers are not only true, but very effective in the context of adversarial questioning. Click here and here for a much more in-depth discussion on the how to think about questions properly and how to answer questions safely, truthfully, and in a way that puts witnesses, not opposing counsel in control.
For more insights from Litigation IQ, check out the following posts:
Jeff Dougherty, M.S.
President - Litigation IQ
713 392 8135
Comments