Depending on your background and taste for a healthy debate, attorneys can make for excellent arguers. Whether it is in a court of law or simply taking council with their client, qualified lawyers have been taught the art of the convincing others regardless of the circumstances or even the facts in some cases.


This is also known as the “gift of the gab” in regular circles. Some people happen to make a healthy career out of that gift.


So how does this play out in real life? Is there a handbook on the do’s and don’ts of linguistic mastery within the legal profession?


Truth be told, there are tricks of the trade that attorneys will tap into as they attempt to persuade a judge and jury of their client’s rights or innocence. That is the whole truth.

Keeping Time In Mind


Legal experts will teach their students a number of techniques throughout their career, but one of the most important elements that goes beyond content is the style and presentation of delivery. This speaks to the inflection of certain words, including pauses for vital moments of consideration for the jury and timing of the arguments.


A summary should not venture beyond 20 minutes. Any shorter and it will either presume innocence or illustrate that the defense has a lack of confidence. Likewise, a summary that reaches beyond that timeframe will inform a judge and jury of a lack of clarity throughout a case.

Open, Comparative Speech


Whereas philosophers might convince the general public greater than attorneys who are viewed skeptically by many, the best debaters will try to break down the cynics by being open and transparent in their speech. They will not hide from the facts that hurt their case, but rather attempt to put them into context against the facts that do fall in their favor. There will also be an ability to speak comparatively about the weaknesses and doubts over credibility for those opposing side of the bench, whether they be in the defense or prosecution.

Facts Combined With Inferences


The best attorneys will continue a common theme and thread throughout their line of argument. This will not waiver at any moment and begin with the opening statement and end with the concluding statement. To achieve this target, they will blur the line between hardened and proven facts with inferences that are likely to be true, but have not been proved in a court of law. The facts will work as the backbone of the case but should there be testimony or a claim in an attorney’s favor, then that should be included on a regular basis.