I am not a fan of speed in court for the sake of moving fast. However, I believe that lawyers have an annoying tendency to repeat themselves over and over - in the hope of being more persuasive. It just turns out to be boring.
Just for comparison - OJ’s capital murder trial lasted 11 months with jury selection taking up about 3 of those months.
I defended a capital case, as a young lawyer, where we picked the jury in one day and had a verdict on day 5. I know most of this depends on the prosecutor, I get that - but you can get to the point and still be effective.
On the civil side of things, I recently tried a car wreck case to a jury where all of the evidence was completed in less than 90 minutes. We had 2 witnesses. My client had been treated and released from the ER.
The outcome wasn’t compromised by efficiency: we got a $100,000 verdict against the insurance company’s offer of $3,500. And, in the process, we respected the judge and jury's time.
Does it pay to hire a personal injury lawyer? Well, it did for my client. And, icing on the cake - we didn't waste the court or the juror's time.