The study of rhetoric is rooted in classical Greek philosophy and the mastery of rhetoric/argument was then seen as a desirable skill. ‘Rhetoric’, in modern times, is often used dismissively and seen as meaningless and perhaps manipulative as intimated in the phrase “mere rhetoric”. During the Presidential campaign, President Obama’s gift of rhetoric was often used to minimize the impact of his message—“oh he’s good at talking all right, but what is he saying?”

In the courtroom, you can use the same strategy. Frame opposing counsel’s oratory as ‘rhetoric’ and that becomes a code word between you and the jury for “meaningless and perhaps manipulative”. You, on the other hand, have “reality”—a truthful and honest account. (Just make sure you back up that assertion with some facts.)

Other strategies to underscore your adversary’s verbiage as meaningless rhetoric could include presenting yourself as consistent (where your opponent is inconsistent or ‘flip-flopping’) and producing scientific data to back up your claims (Symon, 2000). These tactics make your own presentation persuasive while throwing doubt onto your opponent’s presentation.   [Because these terms can be culturally loaded due to their use in the political sphere, be careful in choosing your dismissive or laudatory terms.  We recently advised a client to change his description of a wildly creative witness from “rogue” to “an innovator” because of the association with a former governor and budding news commentator.]

Symon, G. (2000) Everyday rhetoric: Argument and persuasion in everyday life. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 9(4), 477-488.

Related posts:

1. Simple Jury Persuasion: Beware what the other side will tell you…
2. Simple Jury Persuasion: KISS–Keeping it simple, simple…
3. Simple Jury Persuasion: Make an emotional connection with your jury
4. Simple Jury Persuasion: It feels good to get along
5. Simple Jury Persuasion: Be credible