Know how a jury sees your case before you decide what it’s worth

Upload your case file and put it in front of a panel of simulated jurors matched to your venue. In minutes, you see how they vote, what they would award, and why. When the case changes, run it again.

Book a demo See how teams use it →

Upload your files and ask a question. A panel built for your venue answers in minutes.

Built for litigation teams, insurers, and general counsel

Trial teams

Which story wins the room?

Test themes, openings, exhibits, and witness video on jurors matched to your venue. Keep what moves the panel, cut what doesn’t, and see who you’d strike.

Test your story →
Theme pull on verdictDram shop case
Intervening criminal act
+52%
Re-served after a spill
+49%
Warnings adequate
+38%
Insurers

Try it or settle it?

Get the verdict distribution and damages curve for the claim’s actual venue. Set reserves on evidence and walk into mediation knowing the range.

Price the exposure →
10,000 jury combinationsSame case
23% 20% 57%
Typical plaintiff award$475K
Expected exposure$109K
General counsel

What do I tell the board?

An independent, evidence-based answer on whether to settle or fight, for any live matter, in days. Bring it to your next strategy call with outside counsel.

Get the answer →
Matter summarySame case
Defense verdict likelihoodHigh
Outcome range$0 – $475K
Hung-jury risk20%
RecommendationStrong trial position
For litigation teams

A mock trial for every version of your case

A live focus group tests one version of your case. A simulation takes minutes, so you can test them all. Change the closing, swap an expert, lead with a different theme, and watch how the panel moves.

  • Themes ranked by pull. See which facts drive votes for each side, and by how much, so you know what to lead with.
  • Juror profiles to seat or strike. See which backgrounds and experiences lean your way in this venue before jury selection starts.
  • Witness and expert video. Show footage and see who comes across as credible before you put them on the stand.
  • Interview any juror. Ask a holdout what would change their mind, or group jurors into a panel and watch them deliberate.
Dashboard chart ranking the factors that pull jurors toward plaintiff or defense

From a dram shop case. Each row shows the share of jurors who cited that fact, ranked by how strongly it pushed them toward one side. Whether the bar kept serving a visibly drunk patron pulled hardest toward the plaintiff.

For insurers

Try or settle, priced on evidence

Every claim gets the same treatment: a panel matched to the claim’s venue, 10,000 jury combinations, and a full damages curve. Run it when you set reserves, before mediation, and again when new facts land. The method stays the same across the whole book.

Dashboard chart of verdict outcomes across 10,000 jury runs, with the jury vote distribution

One case, run 10,000 ways. Every jury the venue could seat, grouped by final vote. In this case, a strong defense position with a hung-jury risk worth pricing.

  • Exposure you can defend. The number is verdict likelihood times typical award, taken from 10,000 simulated juries in the claim’s actual venue.
  • See the tail risk. The damages distribution shows the nuclear-verdict scenarios that a single mock trial never reveals.
  • One method across the book. Every claim gets the same test, which makes try-or-settle calls comparable across adjusters and regions.
  • Rerun at every decision point. New deposition, new demand, new venue: get an updated answer in minutes, even mid-negotiation.
For general counsel

A settle-or-fight answer you can take to the board

When a matter lands on your desk, the honest answer is usually a range and a set of reasons. Get both from an independent panel, then use them to pressure-test outside counsel’s strategy and budget.

  • A defensible number. Outcome ranges come from a documented, repeatable method, ready for the board deck and the auditors.
  • Reasons in plain language. Jurors explain what moved them in their own words, ready to drop into the decision memo.
  • A second opinion on strategy. Compare outside counsel’s theory of the case against what moves the panel.
  • An answer in days. Skip the recruiting, the facility, and the six-figure research line until you know the case deserves them.
Matter summary · Dram shop casePrepared in 2 days
Defense verdict likelihoodHigh · 57% of panels
Plaintiff verdict likelihood23% of panels
Typical award if plaintiff wins$475K
Expected exposure$109K
RecommendationStrong trial position; settle only below exposure
Why: jurors treat the later crash as an intervening cause (+52% toward defense). The over-service story pulls hard the other way (+49%), so a surviving dram shop claim changes the math. Retest after the bartender deposition.

Watch the panel deliberate

Group your jurors into a panel and they argue like a real jury. They respond to each other, concede points, and change their votes. You see who frames the debate, whose argument carries the room, and who won’t budge.

Deliberation · Dram shop case12-juror panel · grouped from the 100
PW
Foreman
Patricia, 58
MB
Lead voice
Marcus, 54
RD
Holdout
Ray, 67
DK
 
Dana, 31
SC
 
Sam, 45
TM
 
Tess, 29
6 6 9 3 Defense Plaintiff First vote After deliberation
3 jurors changed their minds
PW
Patricia · Foreman
Let’s start with one thing: should the bar have stopped serving him?
MB
Marcus · Lead voice
Maybe. But the worst injuries came from the crash afterward. That’s a separate event the bar didn’t cause.
RD
Ray · Holdout
He was visibly drunk and they kept pouring. I can’t get past that.
DK
Dana
Without the video I can’t assume they over-served him. Marcus has a point on the crash.
One persuasive juror moved three votes. Marcus reframed the later crash as an intervening cause, the single argument that flipped the panel from a hung 6–6 to 9–3 for the defense.
Side by side

A human mock jury vs simulated jurors

In a published head-to-head test, both reached the same verdict. The difference is what you can do with the panel afterward.

Human mock jurySimulated jurors
Time to an answerHours of deliberationMinutes
Lead timeWeeks of recruiting and schedulingRuns the day you upload
Juries testedOne panel10,000 combinations
Who sits on the panelWhoever answers the recruiting adJurors built to mirror the venue’s pool
Reading the case fileWhat fits into one sittingEvery juror reads every page
Themes surfacedWhat comes up in the debriefEvery theme, ranked by pull on the verdict
DamagesOne numberThe full curve, including the tail
Testing a new versionA second engagementRerun in minutes, as often as you want
Changing one factThe panel can’t unhear version oneRehears the case fresh, every time
Questions you can askWhat a moderator can ask politelyAnything, even what you’d never ask a stranger
Explaining their votesA show of handsEvery vote comes with reasons, on the record
Following up laterThe panel went homeSame jurors, available next month
Who hears your strategyA room of recruited strangersNo one outside your team
When it can runBusiness hours, booked aheadNights, weekends, the eve of mediation

From teams using it on real cases

“We ran our materials through GPT and it gave the logical verdict. The Viewpoints jurors answered the way real people do, with the same inconsistencies, and matched what we saw in our live mock trial.”

Trial partner, Am Law 100 firm

“The simulated panel matched our mock jury and surfaced broader themes than we’d tested for.”

In-house trial counsel, top-10 U.S. insurer
Am Law 100 firms
Trial and settlement strategy
National insurers
Try-or-settle and claims testing
Patented
Proprietary simulation method
SOC 2 Type II
Independently audited security
No training on your data
Your case files never teach our AI, or anyone else’s
Zero data retention
The AI services we use keep nothing you upload

Common questions from counsel

How is this different from other legal AI?

Most legal AI reviews documents, drafts contracts, or researches precedent. Viewpoints.ai models how people decide. It shows how jurors in your venue react to your story, your evidence, and your arguments, and which themes drive their votes.

Should I trust the verdict and damages numbers?

Treat them as directional. The most reliable value is in the themes that drive votes, the ability to rerun and compare versions, and the deliberation dynamics. That said, in a published head-to-head test (DRI’s For The Defense, May 2026) the simulated verdict matched a live human jury on the same case.

Can the jurors really deliberate with each other?

Yes. Group any of your jurors and they respond to one another like a real panel: they push back, concede points, and change votes. You can designate a foreman and watch which voices carry the room.

Can I simulate a jury for a specific jurisdiction?

Yes. Panels are built to mirror the jury pool of any U.S. venue, across age, education, occupation, income, and the life experiences that shape how jurors hear a case.

Is our case data secure and confidential?

Yes. The platform is SOC 2 Type II audited and built for privileged case material, with strict access controls. We hold zero-data-retention agreements with our AI providers, and your case files are never used to train AI models, ours or anyone else’s. Your files and findings stay confidential.

Bring your case. We’ll bring the jury

We’ll build a panel matched to your venue for one of your live matters, then walk through the verdict, the themes behind it, and an interview with any juror you choose.

Book a demo