CrimLaw

Transcripts v. Reality

Over at The Buck Stops Here, Matt Evans comments that upon reading a federal supreme court transcript he "was struck by how very few instances there are where anyone utters more than two sentences in a row that are structurally and grammatically flawless."

I see a similar thing each and every time I get a trial transcript. I flip to that number one, primo, most excellente, amazingly wonderful closing argument that I remember making and suddenly I am reading the rantings of a drooling idiot who has problems completing a sentence or even a thought. The reality, of course, is that there is an interaction occurring which the transcript cannot portray. There is a shared thought process in the courtroom during an argument. You know Judge Smith and can see he's just about to shred you for the argument you're making or that he's already convinced. You don't know the jurors personally but you've started to make a particular argument and juror number 7 (who you think is sympathetic to your client) rolls her eyes. If you are any good at all you react to these things as quickly as possible. As well, when most people argue something with passion there are incomplete sentences and thoughts but you score points because the jury feels with you.