"You are a juror in a court of law. What would be your verdict?"
I've learned to specifically NOT ask anyone to be the juror, but instead be the responsible INVESTIGATOR whose task it is to sniff out the tiniest leads, follow up on them and try to present the most plausible account of what happened.
If you ask them to simply be the juror. They will (often arrogantly) sit back and say you haven't "proven" your case, completely forgetting the government hasn't proven sh*t. The question to ask, after presenting your evidence, is "which position has the most plausible evidence (quantity and quality)?"
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of post