In litigation, not only the parties lie, but the witnesses also lie, and any little secret they think is 'insignificant' or 'not to be shared with a lawyer' can lead directly to an imminent victory.

Therefore, the lawyer must not only learn to distinguish the truth of what the client says, but also consider the credibility of the witness.

In addition, the trial is not only about stating the 'details of the story' that is beneficial to one's side, but also many details that are unfavorable to one's own side.

The other party is not a fool, not everything will come according to your heart, the other party will not ask the questions you don't want to mention, on the contrary, the more you don't want to mention the questions, the more the other party will hold on.

Everyone is professional, and instead of giving up the opportunity to explain, it is better to offer it yourself, so as to make a good impression on the judge and the jury.

This is why the plaintiff's lawyer raised this issue even though he knew that mentioning Robert Bales's true intentions would be detrimental to his side.

This makes his conversation with the witness Laura seem less like facing his own witnesses and more like a hostile witness.

Laura reacted violently to the question, and from the moment she stepped into this courtroom, she had not felt comfortable, as if everyone was working against her.

"Robert Bales hired Cedric to be his lawyer while he was sober and signed an agreement with Cedric to formally entrust Cedric to defend himself." This means that the procedure in which Robert Bales entrusted Cedric to defend was legal and compliant.

"During the trial, when Cedric made it clear that he would not use Robert Bales' past experience and illness as a defense, the client did not object."

"The exchange of information between the parties and the lawyer is protected by the lawyer's criminal immunity, and the parties have no right to back up the exchange of relevant information to anyone during the case."

"Neither can the judge." After a pause, Laura glanced at Brooklyn and added.

"At the end of the trial, after the verdict was handed down, the parties did not express their dissatisfaction with the verdict or expressed their willingness to appeal the case."

"Finally, if none of this proves that the subjective wishes of the client are consistent with the performance of lawyer Cedric at trial, and Robert Bales is serving a sentence in Metropolitan Prison, why not ask the client?" Facing Laura, who had an unkind tone, the plaintiff's lawyer looked as usual, he leaned slightly sideways, maintained a listening posture, nodded from time to time, and waited until Laura finished speaking before speaking.

"That is, judging by Robert Bales' performance during the trial, Cedric's defense was in line with his own expectations."

"While there is no clear evidence to support this, there is also no evidence that Cedric's defense went against Robert Bales' subjective will, right?"

"Think so." Laura agreed with the plaintiff's lawyer's summary. The plaintiff's lawyer nodded and walked to the jury.

"It seems that the facts are already clear."

"After an investigation by the Bar Association, Cedric did not commit a breach of professional ethics, and the facts show that he is a good lawyer."

"Frankly, I admire Cedric's professionalism." The plaintiff's lawyer no longer used a formal tone, but instead adopted a homely tone.

As he walked back and forth, he made eye contact with the juror in front of him, looking sincere and embarrassed.

"Although we have just made it clear that the role of a lawyer should be to help meet the client's demands, not to help the client lower the sentence, this is just wishful thinking on the part of those who do not know the lawyer. But the reality is that most lawyers will do what everyone thinks because of factors such as reputation. ”

"When the client is ready to plead guilty, for the sake of his own chances of winning the case, the lawyer will advise the client to wait."

"When the client is ready to pay compensation, in order to win the case, the lawyer will advise the client to find a way to drag it out."

"Even some lawyers will think of illegal and unethical methods in order to win. Because doing so can increase your chances of winning your case, give you the opportunity to reach larger clients, and earn higher legal fees. ”

"There really aren't many lawyers like Cedric left. He prefers to listen to the voice of the client, to help the client, and to make the client's wish come true. ”

"Is it hard to guess what Robert Bales' wish is? Is he really willing to use his wife and children as an excuse and his former glory as an excuse to escape the punishment of the law and survive as reported? ”

"I have carefully read Robert Bales' dossier, which says that Robert Bales was awarded the Navy Cross and the Purple Heart for his bravery."

"As Cedric said, Robert Bales was a warrior, a valiant soldier. I can't imagine such a person choosing to survive. In comparison, Cedric's 'dignity' should be more important in his heart. ”

"Besides, how do you think that these men in suits, shiny leather shoes, and ties, sitting in a brightly lit studio, know better than Cedric, a veteran, what a soldier is thinking?"

"How can they blame two fighters who have given everything for this country?"

"Is it because they're a TV station? Is it because they're louder? Is it because they are richer than Robert Bales and Cedric? Speaking of excitement, the plaintiff's lawyer danced a little with his hands, he opened his arms and waved up and down vigorously, his body swaying back and forth rhythmically as he danced his arms.

"Why should we dictate their lives?"

"When the watchdog gives the results of an investigation, why should they question the results? Because they're the media? Because they have a larger voice? Because they're louder? Ha! ”

"The federation is a country with a sound system and the rule of law, we have laws, please let professional people do professional things!"

"Please leave professional matters to professional people!"

"Thank you." The plaintiff's lawyer's passionate speech stirred the jury's emotions, and he glanced around one last time, making eye contact with the jurors one by one, and nodding slightly.

Jason Bull in the dock watched the jurors as he spoke, and he and Ms. Jane began to talk quietly as the plaintiffs' attorneys gave their final speeches with impassioned ends.

When the plaintiff's lawyer finished his speech, their conversation also ended and it was Pique's turn to cross-examine. Peake got up and made one final confirmation to Ms. Jane, who nodded and came to the witness stand.

He was silent for a moment, waiting for the courtroom to be completely silent before he spoke slowly.

"I do not intend to criticize the work of the Bar Association and any professional industry watchdog, or their conclusions in any investigation, but I would say that speaking out is a power." At the word 'power,' Pique's speech suddenly increased.

"Who's, power."

"The rights of the law give each and every one of us federal citizens."

"We have the right to have a say about a phenomenon or a result."

"Not questioning the Bar Association's findings......"

"Lawyer Peake." Brooklyn interrupted

"Now it's the cross-examination, and if you're going to make a closing argument, you can wait." Peake's brewing momentum was suffocating, and he was silent for a moment, nodding slightly.

"I see, Your Excellency." He then began to ask Laura.

"Ms. Laura, during the investigation, there was no evidence that Robert Bales commissioned Cedric to confess guilt, right?" Laura bowed

"Yes."

"So what is the basis for the Bar Association's belief that Sedrek did not respond passively while defending Robert Bales?" Laura was silent for a moment and said

"We found no evidence of a breach of ethics by Sedrake."

"That is, you have not found evidence that Cedric's actions are in line with the ethics of a lawyer, just inferences, right?"

"obje! The plaintiff's lawyer stood up.

"The objection is invalid." Brooklyn immediately gave the verdict and turned to Laura

"Your findings are based solely on inference?" Under the gaze of everyone, Laura nodded.

"So may I ask, if Robert Bales's real intention is to accept legal punishment and be responsible for what he has done, why does he not directly plead guilty, but instead respond to the lawsuit and ask for a trial?" Peake pressed on, adding

"From the file, we can see that Robert Bales had a brief hesitation during the judge's questioning of the plea, but in the end he made a plea of not guilty."

"Inferential speech." The plaintiff's lawyer again stood up against it

"He's just reasoning."

"I'm talking about facts, not inferences." Peake turned around and said seriously

"This is documented in the dossier." At least Brooklyn knew that the plaintiffs' attorneys were not talking about 'inferences, not facts,' was not what Peake was talking about.

He was deliberately pretending to be a lake. The plaintiff's lawyer questioned the answer to the question. Why did Robert Bales make a not guilty plea and insist on responding to the lawsuit on the premise of being ready to accept legal punishment and pay for his actions?

Is it just to generate discussion? Or is it to waste judicial resources and increase the workload of the courts?

The answer to this question is known only to Robert Bales himself. Peake didn't know, plaintiff's attorney didn't, and neither did Ms. Laura, the witness.

This question should be asked to Robert Bales, not Laura. Even if Laura was asked, Laura could only give her own guess.

This is what the plaintiff's lawyer objected to.

"The objection is invalid." Brooklyn gave the ruling, and the plaintiffs' attorneys reluctantly sat back.

"I don't know." Ms. Laura is not stupid, she knows what Pique's intentions are, but it doesn't help her, and she is not prepared to answer as Pique thinks.

Pique wasn't surprised by Laura's answer, and he didn't expect Laura to give a 'Cedric forced him' or 'Cedric encouraged him to do it'.

It's enough to don't know. He turned and said to the jury

"Why does a person who intends to plead guilty have to plead not guilty?"

"His words and actions present two diametrically opposed options, which makes him look a little divided."

"Then there are only two possibilities."

"Considering Robert Bales' mental state, if it is due to Robert Bales' lack of consciousness due to illness and many other reasons, then whether it is admitted or denied, it should not be Robert Bales' own will."

"Regardless of the effects of Robert Bales' illness, which means that he remained sane throughout the trial, it is clear that his actions are more convincing than the plaintiff's speculation."

He opted for a plea of not guilty instead of a guilty plea. He chose to appear rather than sign a plea agreement. ”

"In either case, it now seems that there is a problem with Saidrak's judgment of the parties' wishes."

"If Robert Bales himself is suffering from factors such as illness that cause him to be in a poor mental state, he should be treated instead of standing stupidly in the dock."

"If he is sober, his lawyer should defend his innocence, instead of giving up his advantage and passively responding to the lawsuit. Because he pleaded not guilty. With that, Peake ended his questioning and returned to the dock.

His words caused quite a stir. The crowd, who had originally believed that the plaintiff was right, began to waver after listening to Pique's words.

Are the findings of the Bar Association really true? The people of the Federation know their own affairs and have a clear understanding of the virtues of the federal government and various institutions.

Moreover, questioning authority has always been a forte for the Federalists. Putting aside the Bar Association's findings, Pique's statement seems to be more reasonable in the factual situation.

Peake is a smart lawyer who doesn't use the simple 'you don't have evidence' as the main idea.

Under the emotional infection of the plaintiff's lawyer, the jury is in an irrational state, and what he needs to do should be to calm the jury down first and get rid of the emotional influence of the plaintiff's lawyer.

So he took a detour, borrowed the method of the plaintiff's reasoning, and guided the jury step by step, and finally came to a conclusion.

The plaintiff came to the conclusion that 'Cedric is fine' through inference, and Pique used the inference to conclude that 'Cedric went against the will of the party' and retaliated.

At the end of the first round of questioning by the parties regarding Ms. Laura as a witness, Brooklyn asked the parties if they needed to make additions, and both sides said no.

Brooklyn then asked Ray to take Laura and remind the defense to present evidence. As far as the case itself is concerned, the focus of the dispute between the two sides in court at this time is no longer Cedric's death, but the responsibility and obligation of the news media, the boundary of the content of media reports, and the boundary of the law of rights...... In short, not the eucalyptus itself.

This is already out of the scope of the indictment. If this is a normal incident, Brooklyn should stop it as soon as it emerges.

But alas, this is not a simple normal case. As a result, Brooklyn was more lenient than ever with the scope of the trial, and he even allowed Ms. Laura, a person who had nothing to do with Cedric's death, to testify.