Judges, Implied Audiences, and the Transformative Potential of Speech

Lawyers who go to court and try cases spend a lot of time talking about, and trying to figure out how judges think. Because, in all hearings or trials except jury trials, the judge is the sole decision-maker, the one who will either accept or reject the lawyer's argument. And, if you are going to persuade someone, you need to know what is important to that person.

Now, I could write a really engaging post here if I could tell the truth about judges actions, and report on the real conversations of lawyers about judges. Some of us lawyers have very complex psychological analyses of judges that would amaze the judges, and might even be as beneficial as psychological therapy for them, if they would take them seriously. And, then again, some of our theories of how a judge thinks may be so off base that it would make the judge "belly laugh" if he (all our judges in Blount County are male) heard it.

In practicing law, you need to know the law, and you need to understand your judges. You also need to understand your clients. To know the law means you get a real sense of what it means, and how to apply it in various situations: your client's situation and the situation in the courtroom where you need to persuade the judge or a jury.

But, sometimes I think we lawyers sell ourselves short when we forget how much power we have when we really understand the law, our clients and the judge. Because all judges, like all people, have their better and worse selves, have their better and worse days. If you can appeal to that better self on a good day, you may be able to persuade the judge to make a decision he or she wouldn't normally make. When you go to court as a lawyer, you paint a picture. If it is compelling enough, the judge buys that picture and you get what your client is requesting. And, part of that picture you paint as a lawyer is the picture of the judge (the image of the judge). If you can project an image of the judge that is favorable to your viewpoint, then the judge might go your way. What a real good lawyer does is get the judge to imagine himself as the kind of judge you are projecting in your argument.

What I am really getting at is an analysis of rhetoric. In rhetorical analysis, one concept that is discussed is the implied audience, and how the speaker constructs the implied audience in the speech. Of course, there is a real audience that hears the speech, which may or may not be in accord with the implied audience. What is really interesting though is the extent to which a speaker can create out of a real audience the implied audience that will receive his or her speech. In other words, the speaker has to hit the real audience close enough to home and in a way that inspires something deep within or else the audience isn't going to be shaped into the type of audience that the speech is meant for. There is a creative, dynamic process occurring when a speaker really engages the hearer. At times, the speaker herself can be transformed by the event as well. But, the speaker shouldn't forget another part of the picture. For the speaker has to paint the picture, and become the speaker that this argument is meant for as well. That requires that the speaker by transformed by the event as well. The dynamic, truly persuasive argument is one in which the speaker becomes transformed or given to the speaking. That is what gives the speech power to transform the hearer as well. If the speaker simply stays in his or her own skin, he or she only has personal, persuasive power. If the speaker gives himself to the speaking event, then something greater can happen.