OptoJury tests your case story against a statistically modeled panel from your state and county. See where the story creates confidence, where it creates doubt, and what you should strengthen before trial.
A preparation tool, not a prediction of an actual jury or trial outcome.
Start with the question
Live mock juries are valuable because they show you what real people question, which facts they remember, and where a case story becomes difficult to follow. But they are expensive to convene and often leave you with a broad answer: what did this particular room think?
OptoJury is built for the work between those sessions. Pressure-test alternate stories, isolate the fact that moves a holdout, and turn uncertainty into a concrete preparation list. It does not replace live mock-jury research; it helps you decide what to test next and arrive better prepared.
| What you need to know | OptoJury | Real mock jury | Asking GPT |
|---|---|---|---|
| How quickly can I test a case theory? | Run a structured panel read when the story changes, without scheduling a room. | Requires recruiting, briefing, scheduling, and facilitating participants. | Usually immediate, but the answer depends heavily on how the prompt is framed. |
| Does it reflect the place where the case will be heard? | Uses state and county population context to shape the modeled panel. | Depends on who is recruited and how closely the group matches the venue. | General knowledge is not a statistically modeled local jury. |
| What kind of signal do I get? | Recurring concerns, holdouts, proof gaps, narrative movement, and what could change a view. | Rich live discussion, questions, body language, and unexpected group dynamics. | Drafting help, issue spotting, and a fast outside perspective on the material provided. |
| When is it the strongest fit? | Between major research sessions, when you need a concrete next preparation move. | When you need deep live qualitative research and can support the logistics. | When you need to organize facts, draft language, or explore an early question. |
Illustrative comparison based on a 10-person panel and the stated participant rates; recruiting, venue, moderation, and other mock-jury costs vary. These tools answer different questions. OptoJury is designed to help lawyers decide what to test, strengthen, or prepare next; it is not a substitute for live research or legal judgment.
Illustrative report example
The panels below demonstrate the report structure: where a narrative leads, which jurors hesitate, what evidence could move them, and what to prepare next.
This is an illustrative product example based on the Northstar Pediatric Sedation Error sample matter. It is not a prediction, an actual jury, or an actual case outcome.
Full Panel Simulation
OptoJury builds a modeled jury panel from your state and county, then moves the case through several rounds of evidence and discussion before trial.
Each round shows who changed position, what caused the change, and which fact became the hinge point. You see how the panel reasons, not only where it lands.
Read the result in context
Six of ten modeled jurors preferred the notice story.
The timeline gave the panel a clearer way to evaluate responsibility.
Check the inspection time, camera timestamp, and witness foundation.
The vote is only the starting point. Read the report for the concern behind the number, the evidence that could change it, and the next preparation move. The simulation does not identify the legally correct theory or predict an actual jury.
Built on Jury Science
OptoJury builds juror types from weighted public survey data and county population data. It uses published attitude measures as model inputs, then adjusts the panel to match the selected venue.
These are modeled jurors, not real people or generic personas. Each one has modeled tendencies, such as institutional trust, damages sensitivity, reactance, and authority deference. Those tendencies shape how the simulation reads your evidence.
The panel is adjusted to a venue profile, then each juror receives a different response pattern.
The model uses weighted public survey data and county population data. It is exploratory. It does not predict any specific juror, jury, or case outcome.
Narrative Testing
Put two credible theories against the same modeled panel. Compare negligence with strict liability, or your damages story with your liability story, and see which version moves jurors.
This section is about the A/B comparison: what each story asks the panel to believe, which evidence carries it, and where the theory can break. Use the result when you write your opening.
| Compare | Theory A · Negligence | Theory B · Strict liability |
|---|---|---|
| What it asks | Did the defendant fail to act reasonably? | Was the product defective when it left the defendant’s control? |
| Evidence that carries it | Notice, warnings, conduct, and what a reasonable actor would do. | Design, manufacturing, instructions, and the product’s condition. |
| Where it can break | The panel sees shared responsibility or too many steps between conduct and harm. | The panel sees misuse, alteration, or a defect that is not proven. |
Narrative A/B Results
Two modeled jurors remained uncertain on strict liability. Negligence framing created the clearer path.
Case Management Integration
Connect Clio. Import supported matter details, then send the simulation summary back as a note.
You can also enter case details directly when needed.
A careful way to use AI
AI is entering legal work. You do not have to hand over your judgment. OptoJury helps you learn where simulation can support your preparation.
We send the case details and structured juror context needed for each model request. OptoJury uses Anthropic for juror simulation and OpenAI for selected intake and report-analysis tasks. OpenAI and Anthropic state that API inputs and outputs are not used to train their models by default.
Provider retention and safety rules still apply. Read the OpenAI business data policy and Anthropic commercial data policy.
Questions before you start
You should know where the simulation helps, where it stops, and what happens to your case information.
No. OptoJury uses a modeled panel to help you test a case story, find concerns, and decide what to prepare next.
The model uses weighted public survey data and county population data. The result is exploratory and requires lawyer review.
No. They are analytical constructs that summarize modeled response patterns. They are not psychological diagnoses or descriptions of actual jurors.
Early Access
OptoJury is in early access for plaintiff trial attorneys. Join the list and we'll notify you when your spot opens.