At Wexford Law, we think differently. Great attorneys think differently. Successful people think differently. At Wexford Law, we do more than just legal analysis.
We think outside the box with statistical analysis and analytics. The key to any trial is to take a complex subject matter and make it simple by taking your adversary's abstract arugment and making it real.
Michael Devereux attended Harvard University, UCLA, and Purdue University, graduating with honors in economics with an emphasis in statistical analysis and business economics. Michael also studied computer science and cyber security, along with law at Loyola Law School.
While the average trial acquittal rate in criminal matters is 10%, Michael Devereux's acquittal rate at trial is more than 80%. We do not see ourselves simply as 'lawyers' but will always strive to be our clients' trusted adviser whether that be in a commercial or personal context in litigation or business matters.
We provide trial analytics well beyond the law. As any party that has lost could verify, a client needs more than legal analysis to prevail. Many firms only provide legal analysis.
When Michael Devereux first started doing trials his success rate wasn't much different than his peers. He started to apply what he knew best, statistics, and soon began applying his knowledge of statistics and analytics to the litigation process for the purpose of discovering redeeming factors.
Statistics isn't about numbers and equations. It is about justification. Statistics provide a framework of analytics that is so reliable that people regularly agree faithfully upon its logical conclusion(s).
Michael knew that logic alone wasn't enough. Jurors demand emotion too. Logic makes arguments believable. But, emotion makes them powerful.
What Michael learned from the analytics is that jurors tend to unconsciously hide their prejudgment bias during jury selection. Accordingly, it is going to be difficult to put twelve jurors in the box with the values that the trial needs because of the unconscious prejudgment bias.
So we needed to do something different, much different. We discovered that during our trial analysis a huge phase was to locate jurors who are open to persuasion.
In the case of prejudgment bias the question is whether there is a reasonable apprehension that the juror is so committed to an outcome already formed as to be incapable of alteration, whatever evidence or argument may be presented.
We indirectly screen the jury's attachment to the unconscious prejudgment bias to find those jurors that we believe would be fair and honest.
Skeletons In Their Closet
Our next step was to take the trial analytics beyond jury selection and into the discovery phase. Analytics determined that every trial has skeletons in the closet. What hasn't the other party disclosed? What is missing from this trial, consciously or subconsciously? Why are those factors being hidden? Where do we find the evidence?
While the typical attorney will inform their adversary of the missing evidence, thus providing their adversary with a road map to their case. We tend to hold that information close to our chest, much like Perry Mason would do.
The golden rule to litigation is that it is not our job to help the adversary. Many attorneys do not understand that concept and become too excited in the 'gotcha' moment. The overly enthusiastic attorney then becomes obligated to boast of their brillance, thus disclosing their trial strategy.
At Wexford Law our core values are integrity and trust, the encouragement of innovation, teamwork and the continuing personal development of everyone at the firm. That's our difference.