a nuestra historia. Como explica muy bien Steven D. Stark, lo que tenemos que lograr es que nuestra historia adquiera realidad tangible, y para ello será de gran ayuda también encontrar aquellas palabras que permitan que nuestra historia salte del texto y se convierta en una realidad visible y tangible26. En el mismo sentido, Stefan K. Krieger y Richard Neumann, Jr. han escrito al respecto que “Una o dos imágenes poderosas pueden persuadir a la autoridad que decide en formas que un argumento lógico no podría”27.
Entonces, la receta que proponemos en este trabajo trata de cómo lograr que nuestra historia gane la competencia. Quizá aplicando de modo estricto la receta que proponemos usted no ganará todos sus casos. Decirle que así será no sería honesto ni por tanto creíble. No obstante, lo que sí es seguro es que su trabajo como abogado litigante mejorará sustancialmente, usted disfrutará más de su trabajo y, en el proceso, incrementarán sus probabilidades de persuadir al Tribunal arbitral que les toque convencer. Nos vemos en la cancha.
2 STARK, Steven D. Writing to Win, Nueva York, Broadway Books, 1999, p. 101.
3 Ob. Cit., p. 73. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “We confess little faults in order to suggest that we have no big ones”.
44 KRIEGER, Stefan H. y Richard K. NEUMANN Jr. Essential Lawyering Skills, 2a edición, Aspen Publishers, 2003, p. 9. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “Few legal problems are solved by astute insights that no one has thought of before. Most legal problems are solved by diligently learning the details that matter and putting them together into a package that gets results”.
5 Ob. Cit., pp. 8-9. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “What the bystander sees (the tip of the iceberg or the visible part of the lawyers performance) is a tiny fraction of what supports it (the undersea part of the iceberg or the preparation for the performance). In lawyering, the ratio of preparation to performance can easily reach 15 or 20 to It might take 10 hours to prepare for a half-hour counseling session with a client, and it might take 15 hours to prepare for a negotiating meeting that lasts 2 hours (…)”.
6 Ob. Cit., pp. 16 y 17.
7 Ob. Cit., pp. 17 y 18.
8 Ob. Cit., p. 26. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “In a client interview and afterward, you diagnose by learn- ing the facts and figuring out how they affect the client legally, financially, and emotionally. To make your diagnosis concrete, you predict how people and courts will treat the client in the future if you do not intervene on the clients behalf (…) You develop several strategies to protect the client. You and the client choose the best strategy based on your predictions of each strategy´s likelihood of success and on the client´s preferred style of attacking the problem”.
9 Ob. Cit., p. 33. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “Effective strategies almost never consist of throwing everything at the other side and then watching for further developments. The best strategies are based on accurate predictions that a particular kind of future event will cause victory – if only that event itself could be made to happen.”.
10 Ob. Cit., p. 8. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “Effective lawyers work to achieve specific goals”.
11 Ob. Cit., p. 8. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “That requires more than knowledge of statutes and case law. It requires the ability to plan ahead, a refusal to place yourself at the mercy of events, decisiveness (the capacity to act under pres- sure), presence of mind (the capacity to reflect among options while under pressure), and the problem solving skills (…)”.
12 Ob. Cit., p. 130. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “These different versions of “what really happens”, cognitive psicologists tell us, result from the manner in which we process and organize information”.
13 STARK, Steven D. Writing to Win. The legal writer, Nueva York, Broadway Books, 1999, p. 71. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “(…)They are a way to appeal to a judge´s or reader´s feelings”.
14 Ob. Cit., pp. 71-72. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “Face it: judges consider themselves experts in law. No matter what you tell them about it, they are going to take your interpretation with about fifteen grains of salt. In contrast, your facts are new and best known to you; your ability to be persuasive with them is far greater. Give judges the facts in a case and they can make up their minds. Give them the law and they still need to know the facts”.
15 Ob. Cit., p. 59.
16 Ob. Cit., p. 67. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “How do you make a brief interesting? The most obvious way is through the facts. As shocking as it may seem to first year law students, the law is almost always boring, specially to judges”.
17 Ob. Cit., p. 67. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “The more you know about them, the more you are likely to come up with a good idea for selling them”.
18 Ob. Cit., p. 68. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “Being a good advocate is a lot like being a good detective or journalist: You’re searching as much as listening”.
19 KRIEGER Stefan H. y Richard K. NEUMANN, Jr. Essential Lawyering Skills, 2a edición, Aspen Publishers. 2003, p.168. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “(…) a story that is rich in detail can create vivid images in the audience’s mind. It can make the characters and episodes come alive”.
20 Ser consciente de estos aspectos y aprender a utilizarlos con efectividad para una mejor presentación oral, son temas que aprendí (y sigo aprendiendo) de mi amigo Roberto Ángeles, con quien compartí el dictado del curso de Destreza Legal en la PUCP.
21 Estas son algunas de las muchas enseñanzas y reflexiones de mi amiga la doctora Zusman con quien también comparto el dictado del curso de Destreza Legal.
22 Otra importante enseñanza de la doctora Zusman.
23 KRIEGER, Stefan H. y Richard K. NEUMANN, Jr. Ob. Cit., p. 41. Traducción libre del siguiente texto: “Listening is about hearing with our eyes, our ears, and our heart (…) Listening includes figuring out the person who is speaking. What matters
