|
Conflictineering
is creating or using an event to expose the hypocrisy or immorality of a
person involved in a dispute and then restoring order in return for a
fair disposition of the dispute.
This paper
is the 2K10 update of conflictineering. It requires an independent
processor, a head equivalent to a Ram, with only the facade of
compatibility with all segments of society. To run: follow the suggestions
a:\ to z:\ and then rewrite the program as it runs to your life drive.
It's never
been easy to balance the scales of justice for a person whom the
prosecutors in our society have accused in a death penalty case, or as
far as that goes for any indigent person. The criminal justice process
is more sanitized today than ever; however, the task of receiving a fair
disposition of criminal accusations is as difficult as representing a
prisoner of war before a military tribunal. Presently, obtaining
dispositional fairness in a case with serious charges is almost
impossible. All of the great protections of our Constitution are being
interpreted in a way that eliminates a fair disposition for a person
once guilt has been determined. In today's market, you must waive any
opportunity for dispositional fairness if you choose a jury trial and do
not win each and every count in the charging papers. The question from
many today is, how can we cut our losses and prevent the leaders of the
coup d'état from trampling us into total submission? The answer is the
same now as in the past -- it is only clearer now -- we must use
techniques that don't rely upon judicial mercy for success. When we
depend solely upon the fairness of the judge, we suffer the full
consequences of the political winds.
The
criminally accused, and especially those in serious cases, need true
representation. True Representation means engaging in conflict, dispute
resolution and persuasion while still effectively litigating
constitutional concepts. Although many conventional lawyers are
initially overwhelmed at the thought of balancing these skills, they are
not mutually exclusive, and their simultaneous use is necessary for true
representation. This section's goal, together with the presentation, is
to suggest a method for enhanced representation.
CONFLICTINEERING
- This involves risk for the inept; high gain for the skilled. We tried
for over a decade to describe this technique by recounting specific acts
that should be done -- we opt now to define the technique and identify
it with our new word, "conflictineering." Describing the
specific acts has missed the mark; first, because reproducing these
specific acts often fails to cause the original results, and second,
because replicating the specific acts is too limiting on the powers of
the technique.
Attorneys
are the only people in our society authorized to use the full spectrum
of forums to resolve disputes. Most frequently, attorneys do not analyze
representation in terms of dispute resolution. This is almost
universally true of criminal defense attorneys; the natural tendency is
to respond to the charges and react within the format of the criminal
justice system. This reactive method of defense is the easiest, and best
insulates an attorney from criticism. Representation that does not
include dispute resolution, problem solving and negotiation as primary
goals is deficient.
Most
attorneys want to limit the scope of their representation to tasks that
they can do at the courthouse. Effective dispute resolution, problem
solving and negotiation usually require a much larger arena than the
courthouse.
|