When delays are based on inadequate motives, they can be a way to wear down the opposition and persuade it to accept things that are not in fashion. Most students learn about the scientific method in high school. It applies to all forms of science. To refresh your memory, the scientific method is a research process by which a problem or question is identified, a hypothesis is formulated based on the conjecture that it may be true, and then relevant data is collected to empirically test if the hypothesis can be tested or refute.
There are numerous peer-reviewed journals that have published thousands of research studies on scientific methods that explore the decision-making process in general and persuasion in particular. Many social scientists dedicate their entire careers to formulating and testing their theories, and then modifying them as new findings are obtained. These theories and findings then evolve as other social scientists expand and modify previous knowledge. It is not enough to observe a social phenomenon and extrapolate how and why it occurred; rather, it is put to the test to demonstrate how and why it occurred and in what circumstances.
The results are objective observations that are not biased by beliefs and anecdotal experiences. Have you ever lost a case and blamed “stupid jurors” who ignored evidence? Ignoring certain things is the brain's way of protecting itself from being overwhelmed. It's an important aspect of the way people process information. We would like to believe that decisions are the result of logic, common sense and critical thinking. And this belief is what drives us to design our defense based on what seems to us to be an inescapable logic.
However, peer-reviewed studies have shown that there are things that influence decisions that have little or nothing to do with conscious thinking. Decisions may be influenced by personality factors of the speaker or listener, or by the way in which the message was structured, or by conditions that influenced the understanding of the information and the way in which the message was processed, depending on the person's brain structure. Lawsuits are filed and processed because the plaintiff wants to change the status quo. The defense tries to keep things the way they are.
Jurors must decide if the defendant keeps their money (the status quo) or has to give it to the plaintiff. Long before social scientists discovered the psychological and evolutionary basis for why change is difficult, philosophers had an idea. In the 16th century, Nicholas Machiavelli stated in his political treatise, The Prince: “There is nothing more difficult to understand, more dangerous to carry out, or more uncertain as to its success, than to take the initiative in the introduction of a new order of things. When trial attorneys present new information to juries, the first thing they think isn't: “What an interesting and logical idea.
Most likely, it's: “Yes, I'm not so sure about that. Jurors won't change their beliefs, so it's up to trial attorneys to present their cases in a way that makes the message consistent with what jurors already believe. Understanding the liberal versus conservative orientation can be the key. There is a broad consensus that the brains of liberals and conservatives process information differently, leading to their respective political alignment.
But beyond political alignment, differences in cognitive processing also translate into different attitudes and values. For the trial lawyer, it is important to recognize that these differences may be the reason that facts and arguments are accepted or rejected. The degree to which the filter focuses on fear and negativity creates a liberal versus conservative belief system and worldview. Conservative inclinations include security, conformity, authority, predictability, certainty, preference for order, tradition, and traditional values.
All of them favor the maintenance of the status quo. These predispositions must be the pillars of the way in which the plaintiff's case is framed. The status quo is not a reality; it is a perception. Seen one way, it can make the jury resist change, but if formulated differently, it can push the jury to demand a change to set things right.
Liberal juries are more likely to award damages to alleviate the plaintiff's suffering and promote their well-being. However, conservative moral values can result in compensation for damages to the plaintiff as punishment for a defendant whose violation of the rules has placed a burden on society or has harmed a person who was an asset to the community. Together, liberal and conservative moral values, equity, and a sense of social justice and social order can combine to arrive at common ground that honors both and benefits the plaintiff. Lawyers often request suspensions because they want more time to prepare for trial.
The most common reasons justifying the delay include the time needed to get a witness or a new lawyer, the time needed to review new evidence, or the lack of preparation time due to other client obligations or the complexity of the cases. The science of persuasion for trial attorneys demonstrates how the science of persuasion can be applied to client relationships, to relationships with opposing attorneys, and to lawsuits. An example that is important for attorneys representing plaintiffs is how to overcome resistance to changing the status quo. However, the judge should not arbitrarily insist that the case move forward when it is clear that a deferment is needed for a new lawyer.
If trial attorneys understand why techniques work or don't, and why arguments are accepted or rejected, then they can apply that knowledge to all cases. A motion for adjournment is a formal request from either party to the court asking them to delay the date of the hearing or trial. The information provided on this site does not constitute legal advice, does not constitute an attorney referral service, and no confidential or attorney-client relationship is established or will be formed by using of the site. During this process, no one associated with the trial can contact the jury without judges and lawyers.
When a defendant wants to change their defense attorney to another, the court must consider several factors before granting a deferment so that the new lawyer can prepare. Both attorneys can ask questions about your potential biases and can exempt jurors from stopping provide service.
