Stop worrying

Igor Vagin

How to put the interlocutor in place. Verbal attack methods

Language is worse than a gun!

The art of parrying word strokes is the most necessary thing in life. People who, beyond the word, do not climb into their pockets, have been respected since ancient times. The winners in the verbal duels gained fame of great speakers. The ability to sting with a word is valor. In ancient Greece, for example, Diogenes of Sinop became famous for its ability to kick back. About his antics written in many ancient writings.

Before becoming an eccentric and philosopher, Diogenes was engaged in minting coins. But soon he was convicted of “circumcision” of money. Later, the enemies repeatedly reminded him of this “sin of youth.” “So what,” answered Diogenes. “As a child, I not only cut the coins, but also urinated in bed!”

Diogenes himself could masterfully put people in his place. Once he was brought into the house of a rich and powerful person. And, knowing about his bad habit, they warned in advance that he would not spit there. Uncomfortable, they say, very clean. Without hesitation, Diogenes cleared his throat and spat in the satellite’s face: “Sorry, I could not find a worse place!”. On another occasion, Diogenes heard a man who, with the air of a connoisseur, was talking about celestial phenomena. And he asked him: “Have you come down from heaven for a long time?”

Detractors once reproached Diogenes in the fact that he visits the wretched and obscene places. “So what,” said Diogenes. – And the sun sometimes looks into the cesspool. But it doesn’t get dirtier from it.

Once Diogenes began to beg for alms from a man known for his stinginess. He sarcastically remarked: “I will give you alms, Diogenes, if you convince me to do this.” “If I could even convince you of something,” answered the philosopher, “I would convince you to hang yourself!” Contemporaries wrote that once Diogenes began even begging. at the statue. When asked about the reasons for the strange act, he replied: “Do not interfere! I accustom myself to failures! ”

It is also known how Diogenes reacted to the well-known statement of Socrates “I only know that I know nothing.” “I’m smarter than Socrates,” he said. “Because I don’t even know it!”

The name of the eccentric philosopher has been preserved for centuries. The ability to find the sharp word in time is useful to you today. It will help to win an important dispute. It is foolish to object directly, to rush at the enemy, as the bull rushes at the bullfighter. You need to be more flexible, listen to objections and respond quickly and efficiently. Only speed, wit and the ability to understand the hidden motives of the opponent guarantee a victory in a verbal duel. There are a lot of receptions that will help you successfully put in the place of a presumptuous interlocutor. Here are just a few.

one.White of black.Having made a positive out of negative, you completely disarm the enemy. It turns out that he does not blame you, and praises.

– You talk too much on the phone!

– Of course. This is necessary in business: customers are also people and like to talk. And who are you to me, the warden?

– Your seminar does not match the practice!

– And you try these tricks in real life! Many clients are satisfied with my seminar, it helps them in practice. And what is “practice” in general, in your opinion?

2Boomerang.Pay reproach against the one who attacks you. He certainly does not expect such a turn of events.

– You are not protecting my interests at all.

– I may not protect your interests, but I protect the interests of the cause!

More answers:

– You are not protecting my interests at all.

– I barely manage to defend my own.

– Ready to protect your interests, if you will protect mine.

– I am not satisfied with your answers.

– What is the question, is the answer!

3Bringing to the point of absurdity.Reproach can be exaggerated to such an extent that over it you can only laugh. Try, reception is safe!

– In my opinion, you drink too much!

– Would it be better if I ate a lot?

– Would you like me to be forced to beg?

– It would be for someone to spend money, I would not save.

– I’m not greedy, I’m calculating.

– What can you do, bad tires!

– I used to ride with the wind!

– And you are getting stuck all the time!

– So how are we going to bring?

4. “Weak?”

Press down on the most famous psychocomplex, and the enemy will be defeated. Nobody likes to feel weak.

– You dance just awful!

– And what, weakly dance together?

More answers:

– I just remove my legs so that you will not crush them to me.

– Strange, but others like it. Maybe you have no taste?

– This is too risky an idea.

– And you take a little risk?

5. Concrete.Hitting the specific shortcomings of the interlocutor can sometimes save time and nerves.

Stop worrying

– It’s too expensive.

– Do you have no money at all?

– We will talk when the mind returns to you!

– He has not left me for forty years, and you have not even noticed. By the way, when will your come back?

Reception6th. “What would you like?”

This magic formula will help to stump an overly aggressive interlocutor.

– Would you like me to get mad?

– What do you walk like gnawed?

– Would you like me to walk like a bitten?

– You’re a simple housewife!

– Would you like me to be a prostitute?

– Someone must be the master of the house!

7. Exchange of roles.

Did they hit you? Immediately go on the attack. Do not waste time!

– You beat your kids.

– And who else will teach them to fight?

More answers:

– And whose me beat?

– And your beat you.

– What … did you take money from the cash register?

– Is there not enough money? How much?

– Your seminar does not meet practical requirements!

– What are you responsible for? What are the requirements? Look how practical.

eight. “The sharp answer against criticism”Shift accents. Make the adversary mix his sharp remark or catty counter offer.

9.Positive versus negative.

Turn the rebuke into a positive statement. In this case, the attacker will have to urgently begin to defend.

10. “Pridirki” to the words. Feel free to choose any word from the phrase of the attacker. And try to achieve a precise definition. As a rule, this causes the opponent to blur.

Reception 11. Full agreement.

Any attack is meaningless if you agree with everything in advance. Just do not overdo it!

Reception 12. Categorical refusal.

Turn out the reproach on the wrong side and with the pressure prove your case.

13. Super-Idea.

Demonstrate to the opponent a certain goal, before which his reproach will seem miserable and stupid. Speech supposedly goes about important things, there is nothing to carp at details.

14. Self-esteem.

Remember: you are the master of the situation. Everything that you do is true one hundred percent. And if so, you can safely spit on the comments.

Reception 15. Directness against hints.Hidden reproaches are easiest to break, revealing the “little trick” of your opponent. Express openly those bad things that he tried to veil.

Reception 16. Let’s call it “Coup”.

Deploy the reproach in the opposite direction. If you are accused of a lack, then your opponent does not have such a “minus”. Ask how he managed to achieve this.

17. Exaggerated agreement.

Do not be afraid to agree and joke about the comments addressed to you. There is no better weapon than humor. Bringing the opponent’s statement to the point of absurdity, you neutralize him.

18. Absurd comparison.Comparing the bad with the worst, we put the situation in a favorable light. It is enough to add a little humor and you can easily manage to deal with the impartial remark.

Reception 19. Absurd advantage.

The joke will never let you down. And in any situation, you can find a couple of joking pluses. Tell about them, and see for yourself how your opponent is “blown away”.

– It seems that during the operation you forgot to put your brains back!

– Yes, and since then I have the ideal weight.

– You constantly make the same mistakes!

– At least, I do not have to strain and come up with new ones!

Reception 20. Means against boasters.Alien bragging always gets on your nerves. But to expose the “numerous talents and advantages” of the bouncer in an unfavorable light is always possible. The main thing: determination and a good sense of humor.

– My husband obey 50 people!

– Is he a guard at a cemetery working?

– They recently wrote about me in the newspapers!

– Yes, I remember, I read. There was something about a bank robbery.

21. Hidden counterattack.You can always parry the blow with a harsh statement, starting with the words “better than. “.

– You have a fly unbuttoned!

– Better unbuttoned fly, than unbuttoned purse.

– You do not have a haircut on your head, but a cesspool!

– Better dustbin on the head than in the head!

Could bring a lot of other techniques. Surely, you yourself in your life more than once resorted to similar methods of self-defense. It is quite natural! At my trainings, visitors specifically learn accurate answers and think out how best to win in a verbal duel. Here are just a few examples from classes:

– What are you such a crumbling?

– It would be for someone to spend money, I would spend!

– You’re a wimp, you’re not a man!

– Yes, I am not a plowman, I am a dentist!

– Why do you look so stupid?

– And to not stand out from your group?

– Why are you there barely tumbling?

– The rest of them normally hear me. Maybe you have a hearing problem?

– What are you so arrogant?

– This is from the height of the position occupied!

– What a lop-eared you are!

– And what, ears – the main man’s value?

– Yes, and proud of it.

– Nothing, but I will pleasantly set off your mind.

– I do not want to stand out in your company

– Better to be a bitch than a fool!

– You – bur on ass!

– Better to be a lash than a bum!

Another answer option:

– Looking at whose. There is a very nice ass.

– Your skirt is too short!

– Well, with those legs, I can afford it. And what she excites you?

– All sorts of calls here!

– We are intelligent people, let’s get acquainted first.

– What money wanted?

– Don’t you want money?

– I was warned that you should stay away from such boys in ties!

– Excuse me, what orientation are you?

All famous people were famous for their ability to win in verbal duels. We still re-read their original answers and aphorisms with great pleasure. Here are just a few examples:

Zhukovsky to the sick Pushkin:

– Yes, bad luck is a good school.

– And happiness is the best university!

A voice from the crowd turns to Mayakovsky:

– Is it true that from the great to the ridiculous one step?

– Yes, and I take this step to you!

Question to Kennedy during the speech:

– And what can a country do for young people?

– You ask what the country should do for you, and I will ask you: what can you do for the country?

The ability to quickly respond to impartial statements anyone in life is useful. Review one more time all the above techniques and examples. And then try the following exercises. Simply put, learn to come up with ingenious answers on the go. Ready? Forward! So, they tell you:

· You failed the project!

· Can’t you dress more?

· You speak English like a chimp!

· Why did you lie about a colleague?

· You’re too fat!

· What are your weaknesses?

· You can always ask my advice. After all, now your job is not going well, is it?

· Could you muzzle a dog?

· They constantly complain about you!

· On this pie, the mold has already started!

· With you so boring!

· You drink too much!

· Why do you have such yellow teeth?

· Stop behaving rudely!

These suggestions are for you to warm up! Fill your hand (or rather, the language) and do not be afraid to enter into an argument. Verbal duels can not be avoided. But you can learn to always come out the winner.

Chapter 2

Under the cap of the investigator

From the bag and the prison in Russia to denounce is not worth it. The chances of being behind bars for any of us are always higher than the chances of remaining free. Do not wave your hands, think better:

We have all planted. In Russia, there were two vice-presidents: Rutskoi and Yanayev, and now Mikhail Khodorkovsky is one of the oligarchs sitting in. There were two speakers of parliament in Russian prisons: among them Khasbulatov. Even the acting prosecutor general Ilyushenko was sitting. And the minister of defenses is Yazov. And the deputy. Minister of the Interior, and. You see, no one is immune from this.

Conversation with the investigator is an extreme situation. This is not a huhra-mukhra. From this, by the way, depends exactly where you will spend the next few years.

Read your rights in advance and forward to interrogation. It can not be avoided with all the desire. But knowing about some methods of pressure on the brain, you will be able to avoid the worst. Forewarned is forearmed. Of course, it is worth pitying the investigators – their work is not sugar. To reveal a crime is a very difficult task. Perhaps, therefore, the most savvy representatives of this glorious tribe are limited to collecting the minimum amount of information for the transfer of the case to court. To obtain a false confession of guilt or fake evidence is sometimes much easier than establishing the truth. So, sympathize with a better self-beloved. And try to at least morally prepare to protect yourself, being in the notorious office with a bright lamp.

What do investigators use? Your fear, guilt, sense of superiority, sense of revenge, envy. Most of the “zheglovyh and sharapovyh” perfectly mastered the techniques of “carrots and sticks,” bluffing, intimidation, exhausting. They have a standard arsenal for “persuading” stubborn suspects, which are used by investigators with experience and green recruits.

1. Reception “know-it-alls”. The investigator begins the interrogation, reporting on minor offenses that the arrested person had in the past. Gradually, it comes to “present time”. One gets the impression that he already knows about the accused and so on. Some details can be found out in advance from the suspects’ collaborators. If you are not a complete fool – do not prick, even if it seems that everything is open. Who, if not the investigator, is able to pretend that he already has known everything for a long time. A good effect on the brains and demonstration of the possibilities of the investigation. The investigator tells in detail how and what he will use to further uncover the crime. Provides the results of the examination, the results of interrogations and confrontations. Everything is suitable, up to the “random” demonstration of evidence allegedly found during a search. So that the suspect knows for sure: everything will be revealed, and sincere confession makes punishment easier.

2. Reception bluff. They try to present the case as if the confession of the accused is just an empty formality, everything he says is known in advance. And the investigator only needs to find out some minor details. The insignificance of these details puts the suspect’s vigilance to sleep. So there are errors, inaccuracies, and even some major “puncture”. Funny small details can bring to serious facts. In addition, the suspect is in complete obscurity. What does the investigator know? Why don’t you know? These thoughts distract attention, make them nervous, that is, as a result, they again work to the benefit of the investigation.

3. Reception “against each other.” The use of the suspect’s “comrades” who allegedly “have already confessed everything” is a very popular way of pressure. So, one arrested person is escorted to the room and asked to write his biography. Then his collaborators are led past the same room: “Look, he already writes on you.” And at the same time they sarcastically declare: “Well, what are you heroes from yourself? All who could have already admitted everything. Who will know if you are heroes or not. So by unknown heroes behind bars they will rot and will. ” If it’s not possible to squeeze any information from one of the dealers, he is asked to simply say before the second one: “I told the whole truth.” Perhaps he did not utter a word. But the second is now at a loss, you can take it with your bare hands.

4. Receive repeat questions. Our head is an imperfect thing. Too many details for her – an unbearable burden. Therefore, the more a person speaks, the more chances he has to get confused. If he forgets at least something of what he said last time, you can catch him lying. That is why investigators are so fond of asking and asking. As if they suffer from multiple sclerosis. All answers are compared, plus the same method of clarifying minor details is used. By the way, they catch the suspect on indirect, “minor” issues, on what is easily forgotten. Do you think that your “version” cannot be knocked out of your head with a hammer? You are mistaken. Ways to make forget what was said. You can wear down a person under investigation for a long interrogation, repeating questions with an interval of an hour or two. And you can dramatically divert attention, put down vigilance, break the will to resist.

five. Reception of “emotional reaction”. Emotions are the worst enemy of the suspect. Very often the goal of the investigator: to cause a violent emotional wave. It will entail mistakes, inaccuracies, and even full recognition.

On what the investigator can play:

· In jealousy: “You are sitting here, and your friend with your wife is having fun?” (And what difference does it make if it’s a lie? The bluff here is the first thing!).

· On the sense of justice: “Is it fair? You sit, and he walks free. ”

· On a sense of hopelessness: “You have already been surrendered” (a fake interrogation protocol is attached). “Look how many people are sitting, they also considered themselves clever, just like you. They also said: the first commandment – do not prick. And where are they all now? We have all the prisons clogged! ”(Pronounced with a contented gleam in his eyes).

· On antipathy: “Look at what scum you contacted! Is this your circle? They sell their own mother! You’re a good guy, not that these dregs of society. “

· On the feeling of revenge: “This scum sold you, and you pity him!”

· On guilt feelings: “How could you do this to a brother!”

· On the feeling of fear: “You will get a“ tower ”!” (Even if, except for the year of imprisonment, the defendant is not threatened.) “Do you know what prisons we have ?? We will plant with perverts in one camera, then you will know. “. A popular trick: in the midst of interrogation with addiction, one of the policemen flies into the office: “Come on, hurry! It is time for us to go boom. ” Fear and confusion sometimes make a person say something that he did not even plan to say.

6 Reception wear. If a person is tired or just does not expect a trick, it is much easier to “break” him. It is not a secret to anyone that our investigation likes many hours of interrogation, “pounding water in a mortar,” returning to the same thing. And you thought it was just like that?

Reception of uncertainty. Very many people do not tolerate the unknown. Delaying the beginning of the interrogation, the mysteriousness of what is happening, omissions and hints often act worse than physical punishment. The information vacuum exhausts the psyche very much.

Reception of surprise. Investigators adore interrogations “without delay”. The man has not had time to get together, consult with the defender – it’s time to get everything from him. That is why sometimes, despite everything that is written in the law, they try to delay a meeting with a lawyer to the last.

Reception swoop. Calm conversation smoothly nearing its end. This is the time to turn around and ask a key question in a completely different way. The interviewee has already relaxed, and the investigator will easily recognize the most important thing.

Recall Commissioner Colombo from the television series of the same name. Already leaving after tedious “idiotic” questions, he returned two or three times and again asked some “nonsense.” The suspects were happy that he was finally left behind and you can relax, then they bristled at his insolence and. made mistakes. In this case, both appearance and behavior, he pretended to be such a fool, asking stupid and naive questions. His famous cape and an equally famous car of an unknown breed only reinforced the impression of “sillyness”. He himself appealed to the sense of superiority of the interlocutors, constantly giving them compliments. And as a result. I learned everything I needed. Yes, a good investigator is a good psychologist.

Reception “a good investigator is a bad investigator.” Even five-year-olds know about this reception. Two “different” people alternately speak to the suspect. One is bad, angry and rude. The other is good, kind, affectionate. It would seem, do not give in to the bait. But no! The suspect is exhausted, he is simply “drawn” to a nice and good investigator. He goes to cooperate and he is waiting for sympathy, promise, encouragement. Even if it cannot be done right away, the psychological buildup of “from good to bad” and the illusion that one investigator does not know what he was saying to another will add it to him.

Reception of the game with evidence. If the investigator has something to show the suspect, he does it masterly. Sometimes evidence is shown “in ascending order,” psychological pressure increases, and the suspect quickly confesses to everything. If the person under investigation is an impressionable person, the strongest evidence is shown to him right away: even the bloody knife found in the bushes, even the signed testimony of an eyewitness to the crime. Very often no other evidence is required after this.

Reception of mental struggle. As you know, in any person “the devil is fighting God.” And in certain situations of the investigation, it is enough to prove to him that his “legend” will scatter like a house of cards with one touch. And along the way, the suspect is told how good he is, how much he has done well before, how high his authority is and how foolish it is to destroy it all, once he lied. After that, under the specious excuse, he is left alone with his thoughts. And very often the spiritual struggle ends in favor of the investigation.

Acceptance of legend. As you know, adults are lying with the mind. And other adults, that is, the investigators, pretend to allow themselves to hang noodles on their ears. They are smiling, nodding, allegedly completely trusting the suspect. After that, they start to go into details and ask questions. And not one or two, but fifty, seventy, one hundred questions. Even if the defendant had time to think about the legend in detail, he was unable to foresee everything. So, he will have to compose something on the go. He has no right to say “I don’t know”, because then the credibility of his version will be undermined. The written details are instantly forgotten, and catching a cheater is a couple of trivia. In addition, the investigator may suddenly raise an “acute” question without changing the tone of speech and tone of voice. The suspect is lost (after all, everything went so smoothly and calmly!), Does not immediately understand what happened, and gives himself away.

But even the most effective methods of psychological pressure do not give effect without correctly posed questions. Already in the art of asking investigators master! Each question here is double lined. Among the completely neutral questions – come across the necessary, about indirect details. Also, using questions, the investigator seeks to send testimony in the right direction. Sometimes offers to choose “or-or.” Or it provides a choice, but in such a way that the answer “yes” seems most preferable. And sometimes it leaves no choice at all: “One of two things. Either you killed or you stole! ” There are questions-suggestion. If you say directly to the suspect: “You killed ?!”, it may very well be that he will immediately break down and sign the protocol.

But remember: do not lose your presence of mind, do not give up: the investigators have their own little tricks, and you have your civil rights!

Chapter 3

ABOUT POOR CRIME

What is a “good lawyer”?

This is a question that you have to answer yourself when fate drives you into a corner, and when you remember the bitter “from prison and from prison – do not blame yourself.”

How do most ordinary people answer this question?

A good lawyer, in contrast to a bad lawyer, can ruin a criminal case. The bad only collects papers, certificates, in short only imitates the work. He, like everyone, also needs to earn a living. Often the lawyers themselves say: “Nobody really needs it.”

The first word that relates to lawyers and, at the same time, gives rise to a mass of associations – Protection. Protect your rights, your property, your loved ones, and sometimes your life.

“Protection” is a word that in our aggressive reality is almost associated with physical action, pressure and fighting qualities. That is why, a lawyer who tears the throat of his client at the trial, will be considered good by most ordinary people.

Sure tone, pressure, any form of underlining one’s own respectability, competence and infallibility is the key to successful work with the client. By the word “successful” we do not mean at all, as it may seem, the success of the legal proceedings – that is, the winning of the case. The case can and lose. The success is that if the client is not satisfied, he certainly should assume that his lawyer did everything possible.

The execution of these commandments begins at the stage of acquaintance with the case from the words of the defendant: “I know such things, I know how to help you, I will try to do everything possible, but your business will require special efforts. »And, quite often, the story of a similar case is presented with a successful conclusion.

1. Each step should be endowed with great meaning.

Competent and respectable people do not make small and meaningless affairs) and therefore, every little thing is presented as something very significant: “I talked now with the investigator and pointed out to him significant (actually nonsense or nothing at all) misses in your case!”

2. Routine and compulsory conversation is served as something “special”, plus “I’m all in the work! I laid out for your sake! ”.

Do we understand much in the subtleties of jurisprudence, criminal or civil codes? I think no. I even think that many judges, being completely in their work, do not know all the subtleties of the Law – there is no time to delve into them. Sin is not to take advantage. And, often, bluffing, lawyers make even the judges (and even their less experienced colleagues) believe in the existence of certain “mistakes”, inaccuracies, nuances unknown to the opposing party. The defendant will be imbued with respect, the judge or an incompetent colleague will also have a feeling of guilt (“how could I not know such a thing.”).

And then, when the decision is already made, or the case, misled by the party, is lost, the lawyer-opponent will feel or find out the true state of affairs, he is unlikely to want a second time to “spit on his bald head” and admit his incompetence in the square. It will be easier – to find an excuse for a stupid judgment and your own mistakes, and how you should substantiate them by documenting.

This technique is especially effective when the lawyer of the other side is not full-time but “invited” or new and, therefore, cannot know all the nuances of the case. He is usually lost and asks to postpone the case. This has an extremely negative effect on the court, especially if one comments on his confusion with sincere surprise: “But didn’t they tell you this? . Have you not seen this document? . It is strange how with your great experience you did not see this document and did not ask it from your owners. He is directly related to the issue under consideration. ”

Even a very experienced lawyer can be out of the rut with this technique.

It happens that in the motivated part of the court decision, where the arguments of the parties were stated, there are rules of law, which were not available and to which none of the parties referred. For example, in an arbitration court the record of the court session is not kept at all, and it is impossible to restore the picture of the discussion.

Experienced lawyers often use the “Bluff” technique, pretending to read, frankly misinterpret the rule of law on which they base their position. And oddly enough, the court believes this. The judge makes a brief decision at the meeting (“yes” or “no”), then within five days he writes a detailed justification.

Often the judges decide under the influence of the moment, under the hypnotic influence of one of the parties.

Rummaging in the law at the court is physically not enough time. 15-30 minutes are allocated for thinking about the decision. After that, the judge is obliged to read out a brief decision on the merits of the dispute, or to postpone the case (time pressure mode). The judge can postpone the case only up to three times. Therefore, the decision is made under the convincing influence of one of the parties and is emotional. And since in the five days that are allocated to the judge for writing the motivated part, he can write anything, but he can no longer change the decision.

As you can see, the time trouble is working here.

If judges use time admittance, it is necessary to tactfully remind of the principles of justice and equality of the parties in a court proceeding, say “objectivity”.

“Your honor, I think that your objectivity will not allow you to retire to make a decision, without having listened to the end positions of the parties, especially since you are an experienced specialist and cannot help but see that our provisions on this issue can not affect the decision in this case. “

“Dear court, I think that we should not violate the declared principles of justice and equality of the parties. “.

And without a pause further state their strong positions. If it does not work, you can repeat everything again or apply for adjournment of the case, as difficult.

Most decisions are made by the court emotionally.

It’s only in the books that there are doctors and lawyers “equally caring for the welfare / justice of others, regardless of their personal qualities, abstracting from their emotions. We are all human, and we cannot be free from emotions, especially when it comes to our own complexes.

Lawyers like no one else know this very well and use it for emotional pressure on judges, jurors, witnesses, their colleagues from the opposite side and other participants in the process.

They say to their colleague, a woman: “You look bad today! You have a stain on the dress. ”

Judge, old maid, hypocrite and “champion of morality”: “Your honor! Does this person have the moral right, leading, as we have learned, a very dubious way of life, to accuse my client of his deed? “

To the jury: “Gentlemen! My client is as simple as you are. Imagine your loved ones in his place, would you like them to suffer the same fate that the distinguished prosecutor asks for? “

Whatever they are all sophisticated people, but no, no, yes, the lawyer will touch some of the strings.

It is no secret that many judges hate lawyers.

Apparently, because in their eyes – people who do justice, lawyers appear as prostitutes, protecting scams for money, obviously guilty bastards and the like evil. In a word, those who paid. Therefore, finding the key to the judge is a very important point. The old, like the world, method is used: “we are of the same berry field". For example, countrymen, people of the same circle, legal colleagues.

Knowing about the weaknesses or complexes of the judge, you can play on them, and try to arouse in the judge a feeling of sympathy for yourself and the defendant.

It is also important to “put pressure”: to show that you are a strong lawyer, behind whom are “certain forces”, that you will fight to the end and, if you need to, go to instances. Judges are often afraid that a confident, strong lawyer will send the case for review to higher authorities. Who wants to contact?

A penetrating voice, a suffering or angry (depending on the situation) face, emotional pressure, in a word, a natural acting game with multiple recipients of completely different information:

to the client: “I will break into a cake for you! See how I laid out ”

to the jury judge: “I am on the cause of the Truth! See how excited I am! ”

or both: “See how competent I am! “

Anxious or tired jurors can easily make a mistake (remember L. Tolstoy’s “Sunday”), but the task of making an emotional impact necessary an error.

In parallel, it is not bad to disable the attack – a counterpart of the opposing party.

On the emotional side of the impact, we have already said. But there are still methods of dispersion of attention, knocking out of a rut and social mimicry.

For example, you can ask your colleague for a single pen “for a minute” and not rush to give it away so that she is nervous and missed something important or made a mistake.

It is not bad to blame a novice colleague for incompetence: “You are a professional and understand perfectly well that now you have said nonsense! “(Knocking out of a rut).

You can pretend to be a fool (mimicry) and begin to speak obvious nonsense – the adversary will relax, deciding that they will win the case with such an idiot, their arguments, the strength of which they now do not really bake, become weaker and at that time they are dealt a decisive blow.

You can also put down the vigilance of a colleague by offering him help, care, a better job, and at the same time form his “immunity” to attack, a sort of projective guilt: “How much do they pay in your company? Not much! I could offer you a more interesting job. ”

Erotic manipulation with both colleagues and judges is a classic of manipulation in general. She does not need special comments.

Unfortunately, it is not such a rarity – direct bribery of a judge by a lawyer of the interested party. Moreover, it is easier for him to do this than for the relatives of the accused.

Two series of techniques were called psychological karate and psychological aikido.

In the first case, a rough pressure is used: a series of questions, interruption – “this is irrelevant” (although it is very relevant), “everything is clear, you can not continue”, posing questions like “yes” or “no” when In fact, it is simply impossible to answer.

In aikido tactics are more subtle. The lawyer agrees with the majority of the arguments of the opposing party (especially if they are really strong and it makes no sense to deny them). Attacking the attacker “stuck” in courtesies. And here, against this background, there are counterarguments, inaccuracies and discrepancies of the case are shown.

In this case, the lawyer – the very courtesy. You can also put a lawyer’s colleague on an inconvenient place where it is impossible to decompose documents normally, and conveniently occupy yourself.

Overestimation of the waiting threshold.

A reliable method for raising one’s authority (and at the same time as a fee) can be the use of a client’s lack of competence and sophistication in details to overestimate the waiting threshold (another option of bluffing).

Suppose a lawyer clearly sees that the case will pull the maximum for five years, and, given the many extenuating circumstances, the court will give three. He also declares to the client that they are waiting for him for all eight years, but he, the lawyer, “will achieve mitigation”.

When he overestimated the waiting threshold, he simultaneously kills several birds with one stone: he increases his professional authority, shows concern for the client, insures himself against failure.

Unfortunately, today, it’s time for beautiful performances has passed. Incendiary emotional speech no longer affects judges. Apparently the cynicism and the decline of the general culture, in which rhetoric has always been valued by itself, did their job. Emotions can only be touched by the jury. Judges are better off if the lawyer finds “punctures” in the case: inconsistencies, flaws, contradictions, weak arguments – and builds his defense on them.

Acting aside.

And what to do when it failed? How to make the reception of the removal of guilt?

The best thing is to transfer the blame to the client himself.

“You are guilty of the fact that you concealed important (trivial) information from me! . You misbehave. You lied. Say thank you for not giving you more. “.

You can blame the “complexity", The “specialness” of the case: “Your case is an equation with many unknowns” (acting aside).

You can beat on pity: “I tried so hard, you saw it! (And you do not mind me!) This is all the judge is to blame. " (at the same time it is also a transfer of the blame to the side or acting aside).

Memo.

Let us list again the techniques and psychocomplexes involved in the work of a lawyer.

· Paternalistic model of building relationships, that is, submission until the suppression. First, as the most suitable for post-Soviet culture, and second, as the most manipulative. It includes:

Þ patronizing, “fatherly” manners, turning into direct pressure; confident tone, rigorousness, pressure.

Þ constant care of the image (authority, respectability, competence). Plus, this is the image of the “Father-Defender”, which, in which case it can punish.

· Giving “special” meaning to all, even insignificant or routine procedures, actions.

· Imitation of tremendous effort.

· Personalized manipulation: playing on complexes, sex differences, prejudices.

· Mimicry (to pretend to be more stupid than it actually is, to present yourself as a “man of the people”).

Þ appeal to feelings of guilt, duty, conscience, fear, pity.

Þ “knocking out of the rut” through distraction, rudeness (shock methods).

Like this post? Please share to your friends:
Leave a Reply