Argumentation Style in Courtroom Rhetoric, by Phoenix Wright
Sept 27, 2019 18:39:19 GMT -5
Keira Asena likes this
Post by Phoenix Wright on Sept 27, 2019 18:39:19 GMT -5
Intro, part 1
The parallels between courtroom debate and physical combat are a well-worn topic by now. In my early career I never paid it much mind, but lately I’ve found a greater appreciation. I credit a certain friend of mine who had a deep love of boxing but chronic difficulties paying his electric bill, as a result he often had to resort to watching the fights at my residence. From watching them I learned about the way fight fans group boxers into stylistic categories, from the technically perfect outboxers with their mastery of jabs and spacing to the hard-nosed sluggers who never say die. The courtroom may not be the place for physical violence (though I’ve witnessed it several times), but the same concept of stylistic divisions applies to the legal profession. The subtleties of them invite study, they hone our skills and expand our mind.
It is obvious that the different roles have lead to different stylistic evolution. The prosecutorial profession is currently dominated by one clear tradition, what I call the Edgeworth-Von Karma school of prosecution. So named because of the dominant figures in it’s development and practice, it is a style that has two defining aspects, the extensive pre-trial preparation and the quest for the so-called “perfect trial”, an artful performance where everything is controlled and united in proving the guilt of the defendant. Every potential piece of evidence and witness is scrutinized beforehand in building the theory of the case, which is continually refined until it is ready to be presented as a perfect opening statement. Logic and deductive reasoning is another hallmark of this approach, scenarios are explored extensively and proven with a rigor rivaling mathematical theorems, arguing on those points is a difficult affair indeed. They are fond of having answers waiting for potential lines of inquiry, sometimes even leaving “traps” which will cast more guilt upon the defendant if the defense chooses to fight them on certain points. The style also works well with questionable and outright illegal practices, which I refuse to endorse or offer guidance on, despite people like Professor Means who endorse them. Manfred Von Karma, his daughter Franziska, and his protégé Miles Edgeworth are the most famous practitioners of this style, but approach has proven so popular that it is easier to list prosecutors that do not use it. The level of aggression varies, Klavier Gavin, Byrne Faraday, and Jacques Portsman show less outright hostility than the typical example, but the elements of the style are still there. The Payne brothers do employ a similar method, but appear to spend less time on the logical reasoning step. Godot is fond of a looser style of argument, acting as more of a “counter-puncher”, placing more emphasis on capitalizing on flaws in the defenses’ theories than bolstering his own. He’s known to be more adaptable in strange circumstances and to spend less time in preparation, but so far he has not garnered the same level of respect as other prosecutors of his generation. The late Neil Marshall and the now convicted Simon Blackquill used a similar style, Neil a little more aggressive and Blackquill more manipulative, but both excellent attorneys; although they are no longer practicing reading their past cases is an enlightening experience. Perhaps the furthest deviation from the style belongs to the Debeste family, whose typical strategy is to make statements, and trust that they will be accepted and form a coherent case; so far the results have been mixed. The Edgeworth-Von Karma school has not proven popular on the defense attorney side, Kristoph Gavin is perhaps the best at applying it, and is a believer in extreme amounts of preparation. Gregory Edgeworth, despite being one of the greatest influences on the style, was not a pure practitioner of it; the nature of a defense attorney’s work make it difficult to conceive of a perfect trial.