A Civil Action
In a trial, rhetoric is an important part in the success or failure of a case. This is a double-edged sword; it can play out either good or bad. Rhetoric can be used to stress an important detail or idea, but it can also to derail the other side's case, or, just take them out mentally. Unfortunately for Jan, it didn't work to his advantage. Facher's repeated objections caused Jan to lose track and to disturb him. This is not fair, nor right, but it is a part of the legal game that a lawyer must be ready to deal with. If a lawyer is thrown off balance by these tactics, the jury will most likely notice this, and it can be seen as a sign of inconsistency; hurting the chances of presenting a successful case. However, these tactics are viewed differently, depending on the side of the courtroom one happens to be on. To the defendant who happens to be using these "tools of the trade", it is a defense which can only help to serve your side better. To the attorney though, nothing can hurt them more. These rhetoric objections serve only one purpose in their mind: to obscure the truth. In a case with so much at stake, these are the times which these tactics are critical, and, they do the most damage. With the Woburn trial over, the families
The Woburn case does support the "deep pockets" theory, but it was an unusual set of circumstances for an unusual case. With money, a side has the ability to hire experts, buy supplies, and invest in studies, all to learn more about the situation to better aid the preparation of presenting the case more effectively. The most important thing to remember is to focus on what you need, nothing more, because of your limited funds. " while they "deter behavior contrary to those rules and values". Reading A Civil Action has not significantly changed my view of the American judiciary system. With this as their duty, they must achieve their goal or society will cave in around us; leaving us in a world without values or laws. To present a legal case from a financial disadvantage is nothing but an uphill battle, as our young lawyer has shown. Both sides had money; one just used it more efficiently. It is very important to the legal profession (in more ways than one) and a great advantage to have in a case. To be at a disadvantage with anything, is not a good sign. Then, and only then, shall a person at a financial disadvantage have a chance at present a case, will and fairly. It is still the presentation, which wins the case, but, as mentioned earlier, money is an advantage, one, which can overcome even the greatest presentation. For the most part, the courts due uphold the law and "reinforce social rules and values.
Common topics in this essay:
Unfortunately Jan,
Civil Action,
,
financial disadvantage,
judiciary system,
rules values,
judge skinner,
|
Acceptance Essays
