Most people list "public speaking" as one of their greater fears. Depending on how the question gets asked, "speaking in front of a group" outranks "death." The image that most have of lawyers is that they not only like speaking in front of groups but also are good at it. While it has been my personal observation that most lawyers fear death well above any fear of talking in front of others, many lawyers fail to remember that people -- in general -- hate being in the spotlight.
Last week, I found myself sitting in my office with a client and going over his testimony. I went so far as to set up a video camera and record his words and mannerisms in order to have some friends comment as to his credibility. (Full disclosure: He has given me permission to broadcast.)
This seemed like good trial preparation: Get client to tell his story (which lawyer already thinks is credible); record it; get feedback from unbiased third parties; then, based on the reviews, decide if client should take the stand in his own defense.
I spent several hours with my client. Though, it was not until then later portion of our time together that I asked him if he wanted to get up in front of a jury of his peers and both tell his side but also be subject to cross-examination. His response -- likely driven by my high-tech video staging and presupposition of his testimony -- was "If you think that it makes sense for me to, I will."
It seems to me that like most people, he'd rather not speak in front of a group; and, certainly not a small group of strangers who have been charged with judging him. And though he is deferring to my professional opinion as to what he ought to do, shouldn't my professional opinion include what is best for my client?
Comments?
When does the client's interest begin and end?
