Look at the Case by width or length and Lawyering
All individuals live in their own images created by their attitudes, ideas, perspectives or even whatever others are painting to shape their lives. Lawyers more and judges less are involved if they cannot control the judicial atmosphere establishing future-based infrastructure. Probably, one of the most important problems to correctly compare factual items with rules is different look at the case, from width or length.
In all judicial systems especially common law, different levels have been categorized for dealing with a case. In a complex legal case, especially when the defendant’s lawyer wants to design a defense strategy for their own clients, success in the first stage is a complacency. Some cases have been made by various elements interwoven in the long period of time. Sometimes, they are affected by different kinds of governmental and civil players. It is going to be more complicated, when media and public opinion are showing individual and social sensitivity about the judicial procedures or its result. Undoubtedly, it is not a logical expectation to end the file as simple as expected by lawyers. Last but not least, it is very common for persons and actors in a case to have less information about it. The defendant and their lawyers have less information than the plaintiff. This is likely to face more problems in order to design a defense comprehensively. In conclusion, there is a necessary need to design a dimensional strategy to win or obtain a predicted result.
A great strategy should be made by elements strengthening the basis of a case. Of course, it is presented differently when a lawyer looks at the case as a defendant or plaintiff. Of course, the point of view of the defendant’s defense attorney is different from that of the plaintiff’s one. It is easier to defend the plaintiff than the accused. To explain more, the plaintiff’s defense lawyer knows more about the angles of the case than the accused. They know what to do clearly. In addition, in the preliminary investigation stage especially, the accused and their lawyers have more limited access to information and the content of the case than the plaintiff. Consequently, when the lawyers or other players of a case do not have more information about the case, at preliminary stage they should move more slowly and carefully. They should seek to obtain more accurate, correct, comprehensive and effective information assisting them with designing their strategies in defense targeted to help their clients escape. For this reason, they need more than other activities to design and implement their defense style in several stages.
To sum up, the acceptance of this approach means that losing in one stage is not necessarily a failure for the accused or the plaintiff and their lawyers. As a result, it is a victory. To explain precisely, they know that they will fail at this stage. They have planned to mislead the other parties or the prosecution. They know that their failure at this stage can be the reason for their victory at the next stage. Because they accept their failure at the initial stage or even plan for their failure. This can also be interpreted as optional or pre-planned failure. They lose to win in the next stage. With their failure, they make the other parties miscalculate. But they know that in the end they are the ones who will win.