You write somewhere here in the comments, that those clients who are telling the truth are new to the system (or innocent, but those do not interest me now) while most lies come from repeated offenders. Shouldn’t it be the opposite ? Shouldn’t the experienced ones have, well, the experience, that telling truth to their lawyer gives them better results ? What if they tried and did not see the difference ? Combine it with your often repeated feeling, that you are useless. And your article about 11 words, which describes a situation, when you dramatically helped the client, for whom you apparently felt sympathy, but it was more an emotional move, not a technical one. (You simply asked the judge to reconsider her harsh decision).
OK, I know, a more straightforward explanation is, that the new clients are less stupid, that’s why they are new, and did not have legal problems many times already.
But still, aren’t the lies a lame attempt to gain your sympathy, because they correctly believe, your sympathy is the most valuable thing that can make a difference for them ?
You would think that the revolving door would help repeat offenders wisen up through experience, but the overriding effect is that they’re repeat offenders precisely because they lack the capacity to wisen up.
What happened with 11 magic words is too arcane and unpredictable to “game”. It mystified even me, and I’ve had the experience of going through criminal proceedings magnitudes more times than even my most decorated clients. I’ve commented here to a similar question but gaining my sympathy through lying is 1) not likely to be consequential and 2) very likely to backfire.
You write somewhere here in the comments, that those clients who are telling the truth are new to the system (or innocent, but those do not interest me now) while most lies come from repeated offenders. Shouldn’t it be the opposite ? Shouldn’t the experienced ones have, well, the experience, that telling truth to their lawyer gives them better results ? What if they tried and did not see the difference ? Combine it with your often repeated feeling, that you are useless. And your article about 11 words, which describes a situation, when you dramatically helped the client, for whom you apparently felt sympathy, but it was more an emotional move, not a technical one. (You simply asked the judge to reconsider her harsh decision).
OK, I know, a more straightforward explanation is, that the new clients are less stupid, that’s why they are new, and did not have legal problems many times already.
But still, aren’t the lies a lame attempt to gain your sympathy, because they correctly believe, your sympathy is the most valuable thing that can make a difference for them ?
You would think that the revolving door would help repeat offenders wisen up through experience, but the overriding effect is that they’re repeat offenders precisely because they lack the capacity to wisen up.
What happened with 11 magic words is too arcane and unpredictable to “game”. It mystified even me, and I’ve had the experience of going through criminal proceedings magnitudes more times than even my most decorated clients. I’ve commented here to a similar question but gaining my sympathy through lying is 1) not likely to be consequential and 2) very likely to backfire.