Shelley C. Spiecker, Ph.D.

Dr. Shelley Spiecker has been advising attorneys on case strategy, courtroom persuasion and jury selection for over 19 years. With a doctorate in legal communication, Dr. Spiecker has extensive experience in the design and analysis of mock trial and focus group research. Her studies of the tactical use of innuendo in the courtroom and her analyses of effective opening statements and closing arguments have been recognized as valuable contributions to the trial consulting field. Dr. Spiecker is a national leader in strategic trial solutions in energy litigation and is frequently asked to lecture on emerging research findings.

Dr. Shelley Spiecker has been advising attorneys on case strategy, courtroom persuasion and jury selection for over 19 years. With a doctorate in legal communication, Dr. Spiecker has extensive experience in the design and analysis of mock trial and focus group research. Her studies of the tactical use of innuendo in the courtroom and her analyses of effective opening statements and closing arguments have been recognized as valuable contributions to the trial consulting field. Dr. Spiecker is a national leader in strategic trial solutions in energy litigation and is frequently asked to lecture on emerging research findings.


REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
 

Dr. Spiecker is nationally recognized as having unparalleled expertise in energy litigation. In one example, in a two and one-half month trial in a small community in southern Mississippi, Dr. Spiecker’s strategy advice, assistance with preparing witnesses, and jury selection assistance were instrumental in leading to a complete verdict in favor of two oil and gas companies. The two defendant energy companies were particularly pleased with the unique value added since the venue reflected significant bias against energy companies. We conducted a mock trial in the case which led directly to the co-defendants’ refinement of trial strategy to present a united front centered on two distinctly different messages, which was critical given the facts of the case and the venire’s predisposition to suspect that two energy companies would conspire in their defense.
Dr. Spiecker is also known for her fine-tuned abilities to work with witnesses to enhance credibility and likeability, and to translate unfamiliar concepts into identifiable issues. In one construction case example, the issue involved construction delay and included complex engineering analyses and testimony from seasoned construction workers who had never before communicated to jurors. She conducted a focus group to test key graphics concepts and worked extensively with the construction workers to help them feel more comfortable, friendly and approachable to the jury. Together with the trial team, she developed themes and language strategies to make the complexities of the delay issues understandable. The outcome of the case was a complete jury verdict in our client’s favor, plus an award of attorneys’ fees.

EDUCATION
Doctor of Philosophy, Communication Studies – University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas. 1998. Emphasis on legal communication and qualitative and quantitative research methods.
Master of Arts, Communication Studies – University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas. 1995. Emphasis on legal communications and social influence.
Bachelor of Arts with Honors, Communication Studies – University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas. 1993.

MEMBERSHIPS AND AFFILIATIONS
 American Society of Trial Consultants – 1993 to present
 Communication and Law Commission of National Communication Association – 1992 to present
 American Association of Public Opinion Research – 1992 to present
 American Psychological Association - Psychology and Law Division – 1992 to present
 Institute for Energy Law – 2007 to present
 American Bar Association – 2007 to present

SELECTED PUBLICATIONS
Spiecker, S.C. (March, 2011). Test the Waters, But Don’t Assume That Bias is Forever: Deepwater Hasn’t Translated to Deep Trouble for Energy Defendants. Persuasion Strategies.
Spiecker, S.C., Broda-Bahm, K., Boully, K.R., Lisko, K.O. (September 2009). Corporate America in Lean Times: Do Today’s Jurors Have Shallow Sympathy for Deep Pockets? InsideCounsel.
Spiecker, S.C., Worthington, D.L. (April, 2009). Explorations of Juror Reasoning: Extending Our Understanding of the Influence of Attorney Opening Statement/Closing Argument Organizational Strategy. Communication Law & Ethics Division of the Eastern Communication Association, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Spiecker, S.C., Broda-Bahm, K., Boully, K.R., Lisko, K.O. (September, 2008). Are Judges Becoming More Like Jurors? InsideCounsel.
Spiecker, S.C. (June, 2008). Witness Preparation: A Key Component in the Successful Defense of Employment Cases. Persuasion Strategies.
Spiecker, S.C., Broda-Bahm, K., Boully, K.R., Lisko, K.O. (September, 2007). Arbitration v. Jury Trial: What is the Real Difference? InsideCounsel.
Spiecker, S.C., Broda-Bahm, K., Lisko, K.O., Boully, K.R. (July, 2006). Anti-Corporate Bias is a Given, But Corporations Should Not Give Up on the Courtroom. Persuasion Strategies.
Spiecker, S.C., Broda-Bahm, K., Lisko, K.O., Boully, K.R. (August, 2006). Mocking Corporate America. InsideCounsel.
Spiecker, S.C., Broda-Bahm, K., Lisko, K.O. (November, 2005). Jurors in Red & Blue America. Corporate Legal Times.

Persuasion Strategies Team Ken Broda-Bahm Ph.D. David Carter Jason Bullinger Charles K. Davis, Director Prudy Crews Kevin Boully, Ph.D. Pam Miller Donald E. Yost Nick Bouck Shelley C. Spiecker, Ph.D. Sherrie Zion Arianne Fuchsberger