Another in a series of posts about how the craft of prosecutorial trial lawyering mirrors the craft of writing, short form and long.
In a criminal prosecution, there is one overarching story, presented in summary form in the government's opening statement, and brought to an ending in closing arguments.
But within that long form story are many short stories, mostly found in the back-and-forth direct examination of the witnesses in the government's case. All of those exchanges have to be pointed and succinct, but at the same time directed towards an end result. And all of those exchanges, as short stories, have to have their own arc.
Case in point: the stereotypical drug-addicted witness to a drug-related murder has to be given rein to offer their account about that murder within the context of their life experience, if they're to be able to convey that their story is truthful.
A prosecutor's direct examination of any of their witnesses — from the most virtuous to the least — boils down to this: authentic and purposeful conversation. Which makes the process pretty much indistinguishable from pure dialogue in fiction.
More to come as to how a prosecutor uses direct examination to make flawed witnesses in a trial believable to a jury — with resonances in the fictional world.