Momus Analytics
From Instinct to Insight in Jury Selection

Legal analytics software has matured beyond document review and billing oversight. Trial teams now face a more immediate pressure point inside the courtroom itself: jury selection. Voir dire unfolds quickly, information arrives in fragments and attorneys must decide in real time which jurors to strike and which to seat. For executives responsible for investing in data science and analytics technology, the question is whether software can meaningfully improve that moment of judgment without slowing it down. Traditional jury selection has long relied on instinct and perceived rapport. Attorneys attempt to read tone, demeanor and limited answers under time constraints. That approach, while familiar, rests on subjective interpretation. It offers little structure for comparing multiple jurors across dozens of attributes and even less protection against unconscious bias. Modern legal analytics platforms that focus on trial strategy must therefore demonstrate that they can convert dispersed juror information into disciplined analysis rather than another layer of distraction. Credible systems begin with structured data. Jury selection software should enable attorneys to input detailed juror characteristics, attitudinal responses and background indicators in a consistent format. The value lies not in collecting more information, but in processing it through a transparent methodology that produces rankings or assessments grounded in behavioral research and historical patterns. Executives evaluating such technology should look for evidence that outputs are tied to defined data points rather than opaque scoring. Relevance to courtroom dynamics also matters. A platform that treats each juror in isolation misses the reality of group deliberation. Trial outcomes are often shaped by influential personalities within the jury room. Analytics that attempt to identify patterns of leadership, influence or alignment with case themes offer greater strategic clarity than surface-level profiling. Software must translate those insights into actionable guidance on peremptory strikes, cause challenges and scenario planning before decisions are locked in. Adoption depends on usability under pressure. Jury selection moves quickly, so tools must accommodate rapid data entry, instant recalculation and intuitive displays. Executives should assess whether onboarding, training and live support are sufficient to ensure attorneys can rely on the platform during trial week rather than treating it as an optional supplement. Unlimited practice environments and structured demos often signal that a vendor understands the learning curve inherent in shifting from intuition to analytics. Momus Analytics applies data science directly to the jury selection process for plaintiff attorneys. It restricts access to plaintiff firms and vets users accordingly. The platform aggregates detailed juror attributes and attitudinal responses, processes them through an algorithm informed by research on group dynamics and generates objective rankings and assessments to guide strike strategy. It allows attorneys to model strike scenarios before final decisions and offers unlimited training and live support during trial. For executives seeking disciplined, courtroom-focused analytics rather than general reporting tools, Momus Analytics presents a specialized solution aligned with the realities of voir dire and deliberation. ...Read more