In comparison to Paul Bergman's legendry book "Represent Yourself In Court: How to Prepare & Try a Winning Case", this one is a legendary rival of a different flavor. The author entrusts his genuine instincts and writes as an advocate for the underdogs, needy, and less powerful in face of unfair, expensive, and complex system of justice. Unfairness stems from the persons in charge of delivering justice. The Author uses Judge Brian Duff as an example for personal effect on the service of justice.
Despite the critiques on the poor organization and trivial inaccuracies in the book, it serves as an informal, casual, and benign display of information that is easy to read and assimilate while time sneaks by. (Bergman book's strict organization renders its reading laboriously time demanding). Once every few pages, the author interjects the highlighted concepts in full-page tables.
The author convincingly achieves his goal that reason and logic could triumph if supported by simple know-how. In many of his anecdotes about litigants betrayed by incompetent counsels, the author makes the reader senses his insider's frustration with his own profession. He contends that his book was driven by the dilemma of the legal profession of: whether lawyers should be in it for self-enrichment or moral conduct?
It might be quite demanding to retrieve information from the book if you are in a hurry for a court appearance, since the book lacks clear and unified template. However, if you enjoy reading for relaxing and focusing on deep thoughts and strategies, this book has it. For example, it stresses on slow talking in clear and systematic manner in many effective ways. Slow, slow, and slow talking in front of the court is highly stressed for reporting and logical reasons of trying evidence and appeal. It then addresses the issue of not repeating evidence unless there is a specific need other than rehearsing it.
The author alerts the self representatives of the perils of objection to adversaries and explains reasonable situations when objection is a plus. He then stresses on the fact that the self-representative should realize that both the judge and the jury have mere cursory knowledge of the lawsuit at hand which requires the pro se not to assume any previous knowledge and to lay the foundation form beginning to end in logical fashion.
Ethos, pathos, and logos of Aristotle describe the elements of his closing arguments. Those are summarized as attitude of orator, his passion and emotion, and finally his logical analysis in summing up his case to the court. He emphasizes understatement and simple common sense as effective tools to abstract truth from a complexly intermingling situation.
The author addresses the science part of trying legal suits and left the art part to the reader to labor at. His strategies of searching for the truth extend far beyond material evidence to moral character, personal credibility, and evidence's relevance and credibility. He then devises a strategy of seeking the truth along all those dimensions of evidence.
Mohamed F. El-Hewie
Essentials of Weightlifting and Strength Training