The defendants package free pdf download

Need an account? Click here to sign up. Download Free PDF. A short summary of this paper. Download Download PDF. Translate PDF. Provided that plaintiff is open to settling this dispute amicably, subject to a concrete proposal that is fair and reasonable from and a reciprocal manifestation of openness from defendant, 1. Pursuant to Rule 18 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, plaintiff respectfully submits that the desired terms of any amicable settlement would involve, first, an admission of amount due and owing to plaintiff and, second, a schedule of payments.

Plaintiff intends to present the following witnesses: 5. Robert Downey Jr. Need an account? Click here to sign up. Download Free PDF. Stanley Brodsky. A short summary of this paper. Download Download PDF. Translate PDF. Brodsky May - Valume 26, Issue 1 thejuryexpert. Brodsky, Ph. Trial consultants and most attorneys are often perceived to be the agents of defendants who are wealthy and able to afford their services.

A common accusation is that most trial consultants, and the large law firms that specialize in litigation work, promote the adversarial success of people and organizations already in positions of power and influence.

Still, there are many pro bono efforts of trial consultants and law firms, as well as efforts of public defenders and court-appointed counsel, to aid individuals who may fairly be considered lower class in a country that avidly avoids class labels.

With much less grace, the tired, poor, and wretched of our society often make their way to the offices of attorneys who seek to defend them in the face of allegations for offenses that are themselves the products of discrimination, undeniable societal schisms, and living conditions and subcultures that poison and stigmatize.

We have come to think of these defendants as hapless and unfortunate recipients of social injustice. The broad scope of social injustice is difficult to change. However, May - Valume 26, Issue 1 thejuryexpert. We start with the undeniable fact that many aspects of the U. These defendants are sometimes seen as doomed when defended by public defenders with oppressively heavy caseloads or by court appointed attorneys who have little time to work with them.

This article is about the need for quick and effective transformations in representation and interactions so that such defendants have a modestly improved chance of success at their own trials.

Before we move into solutions, some major impediments to success must be noted. Hapless defendants are often irresponsible, difficult to deal with, and even infuriating.

That is, they may not show up for appointments as scheduled and often make excuses for their absence. They can appear, when they finally do appear, in dirty clothes, unkempt hair, and they might have poor hygiene. They often do not listen well; in fact, a discussion of legal issues often runs into fatalism, pessimism, or a sense of being distracted, bewildered, or uninterested in what is being said.

Information about plea options rarely gets into any nuanced issues, if such attorney-client discussions get into many issues at all. These clients are often insistent about simple and palpably improbable alibis. Hapless defendants are instantly recognizable by their speech, appearance, gestures, and role- taking. There is the defendant who glares stone-faced at the judge or jury, or who has a poor attitude that serves to alienate everyone. These defendants might ramble, have trouble forming coherent sentences, or they can come across as angry, petulant, or sly.

They can look so odd or socially different from other courtroom actors that they fail to elicit sympathy from triers of fact for supposedly objective evaluations of guilt or innocence. In a recent case that we observed in District Court, a house painter with disheveled hair arrived late in torn and spattered t-shirt and overalls, after which the judge curtly adjourned the proceedings and sent him home to clean up.

In another case, a young man played up to the crowd by giggling, gesturing, and acting as if it were all a joke. The judge took a dim view of this behavior as well and promptly denied bail and sent him to jail. Rather than a halo effect, as when an attractive defendant receives a better verdict or shorter sentence because of good looks, charm, and nice manners, the hapless defendant has a horns effect, with measurable negative effects on verdicts and sentencing.

In a study of mock juror attitudes, Taylor found that unattractive defendants drew the short straw compared to more attractive ones, who were less likely to be convicted and more likely to receive shorter sentences.

There were racial overtones as well; while Black and White mock defendants were treated equally in terms of the verdict, African-Americans were given longer sentences if they were found guilty. While the attractiveness-leniency bias is well established in such cases, in our recommendations we suggest possible ways in which to counter this unattractiveness effect. Still, the literature is sparse with respect to misbehavior, poor clothing choices, physical differences, or behavioral oddities.

In terms of self-presentation, Milford , p. As a rule, low status defendants will be judged more harshly than high status ones, simply because social power resides in recognizing and acting upon the rules of courtroom etiquette in order to secure the best outcome. If they slouch, sneer, or look like a loser, they are more likely to be found guilty as charged. Before we move to propose approaches with the hapless defendant, we need to acknowledge that class differences and lifelong marginalization from the values of mainstream society can make it tough for people who have little familiarity with or disdain for formal legal proceedings.

These deep-seated difficulties and problems are all the more reason to make concerted efforts with such defendants so that justice can be served. With this introduction completed, we now address possible strategies through a series of simple transformations that could be marshaled for use in the courtroom.

There are five working assumptions that underlie these strategies: 1. Nobody can make substantial changes to the fundamental ways in which defendants are hapless. Interventions can only smooth out some rough edges, give pointers for avoiding the obvious faux pas, and outline straightforward steps for putting the best foot forward. The changes that can be made will be brief and transient.

The best pay-offs require over-rehearsing a narrow range of behavioral self-presentation in court appearances. Many of our judgments are subject to a pervasive attractiveness bias. We will discuss ways to redress this unattractiveness-punitiveness bias, including how to have ready access to clothing that is suitable for the courtroom. In the same sense, one needs to obtain access to grooming allies, such as volunteer or low cost barbershops or hairdressers.

It is beyond the reach of most attorneys and court employed psychologists to manage these tasks. For that reason, available community resources may be mobilized to make a difference. Retired persons, community volunteers, and students from both community and two- and four-year colleges are a potential resource for this purpose. We discuss the application of each of these five assumptions in turn.

We begin with topic 1, the May - Valume 26, Issue 1 thejuryexpert. Hopeless and Hapless. Every public defender has stories about the barriers to representing difficult clients. It is not just the unreliability of showing up and issues of body odor and hygiene. With a high proportion of such clients having mental or physical disorders, their attention spans are often limited and their thinking disordered. What to do in order to shift these clients to being hapful the antonym of hapless and viewed in a more positive light?

In his work with difficult to reach psychiatric clients at the University of San Francisco, Dale McNiel and his colleagues have implemented the concept of institutional leverage. By using aspects of housing, public assistance, and medical assistance as the levers, they report being able to nudge many of these clients towards using social services.

We see related levers available to attorneys and the occasional trial consultants who are involved with the hapless; the challenge is to identify and use the levers that can move clients to attendance and attention. The obvious lever of threatening to withdraw from the case can be surprisingly effective when done right.