by Philip Meyer
8. See Peter C. Lagarias, Effective Closing Argument (Newark, NJ: Lexis, 1999), 362.
9. Lief, Caldwell, and Bycel, Ladies and Gentlemen, 129.
10. Ibid., 144.
11. Ibid., 130.
12. Gerry Spence, How to Argue and Win Every Time (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995), 126.
13. Syd Field, Four Screenplays: Studies in the American Screenplay (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995), 126.
14. Ibid., 240–41.
15. Lief, Caldwell, and Bycel, Ladies and Gentlemen, 140.
16. Ibid., 156.
17. Gerry Spence, remarks, NACDL Conference on “Lawyering on the Edge” (Chicago, November 3–6, 1999). See also Gerry L. Spence, “How to Make a Complex Case Come Alive for a Jury,” ABA Journal, April 1986, 65.
18. Spence, “Lawyer on the Edge.”
19. Amsterdam and Hertz, “Analysis of Closing Arguments,” 64–75.
20. Lief, Caldwell, and Bycel, Ladies and Gentlemen, 130.
21. Ibid., 131.
22. Spence, “Lawyering on the Edge.”
23. John H. Blume, Sheri L. Johnson, and Emily C. Paavola, “Every Juror Wants a Story: Narrative Relevance, Third Party Guilt and the Right to Present a Defense,” American Criminal Law Review 44 (2007), 1090.
24. Jemme Bruner, Beyond the Information Given: Studies in the Psychology of Knowing (New York: Norton, 1973).
25. Lief, Caldwell, and Bycel, Ladies and Gentlemen, 130.
26. Ibid., 131.
27. Ibid., 138.
28. Ibid., 156.
29. Ibid.
30. Ibid., 142.
31. Ibid.
32. Truffaut, Hitchcock, 141.
33. Spence, How to Argue, 269.
34. Ibid.
35. Ibid., 271.
36. Michael Roemer, Telling Stories: Postmodernism and the Invalidation of Traditional Narrative (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1995), 282–83.
37. Lief, Caldwell, and Bycel, Ladies and Gentlemen, 131.
38. Ibid., 137.
39. Letter of defense counsel William Paul to Peter Langarias in Langarias, Effective Closing Argument, 466.
40. Lief, Caldwell, and Bycel, Ladies and Gentlemen, 131–32 (bracketed term in original).
41. Ibid., 132–33 (bracketed term in original).
42. Ibid., 133, 135.
43. Ibid., 135.
44. Ibid., 135–36.
45. Ibid., 137.
46. Ibid., 138–39 (bracketed terms in original).
47. Ibid., 139.
48. Ibid., 139–40.
49. Ibid., 140.
50. Ibid.
51. Ibid. (bracketed term in original).
52. Ibid., 140–41.
53. Ibid.
54. Ibid., 141.
55. Ibid.
56. Ibid.,
57. Ibid., 141–42.
58. Ibid., 142.
59. Ibid.
60. Ibid., 143.
61. Ibid.
62. Ibid., 142.
63. Ibid., 143.
64. Ibid., 144.
65. Ibid.
66. Ibid., 145 (emphasis added).
67. Ibid. (emphasis added).
68. Ibid. (emphasis added).
69. Ibid. (emphasis added).
70. Ibid., 145–46.
71. Ibid., 146.
72. Ibid.
73. Ibid., 149.
74. Ibid., 150.
75. Ibid., 152–53.
76. Ibid., 153.
77. Ibid.
78. Ibid., 154.
79. Ibid., 154–55.
80. Ibid., 156.
81. Ibid.
82. Ibid.
83. Ibid.
84. Ibid.
85. Ibid.
86. Ibid.
87. Ibid., 156–57.
88. Quotation in section head from Roemer, Telling Stories, 3.
89. See Peter Brooks and Paul Gewirtz, Law’s Stories: Narrative and Rhetoric in the Law (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1996), 103; see also John Gardner, The Art of Fiction: Notes on Craft for Young Writers (New York: Vintage Books, 1985), 165.
90. Lief, Caldwell, and Bycel, Ladies and Gentlemen, 128.
91. Ibid., 156.
92. Ibid., 131.
93. Ibid., 138, 140.
94. David Lodge, The Art of Fiction: Illustrated from Classic and Modern Texts (New York: Penguin Books, 1992), 3–4. An immaterial portion of Lodge’s quote from Austen is omitted.
95. Jane Austen, Emma, quoted in Lodge, Art of Fiction, 3–4.
96. Ford Madox Ford, The Good Soldier, quoted in Lodge, Art of Fiction, 5.
97. Lodge, Art of Fiction, 5.
98. See Ronald B. Tobias, 20 Master Plots and How to Build Them (Cincinnati: F&W Publications, 2003), 161.
99. Robert McKee, Story: Substance, Structure, Style, and the Principles of Screenwriting (New York: Harper Collins, 1997), 81.
100. Lodge, Art of Fiction, 5.
101. Ibid.
102. Ibid.
103. Ibid.
104. Anthony G. Amsterdam and Philip N. Meyer, “Making Our Clients’ Stories Heard: A Guide to Narrative Strategies for Appellate and Postconviction Lawyers” (Administrative Office, U.S. Courts, 2008), 3.71.
105. Double Indemnity, directed by Billy Wilder (1944).
106. Vladimir Propp, Morphology of the Folktale (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2005), 30–36.
107. Roemer, Telling Stories, 16.
108. Matthew Joseph Bruccoli, ed., Conversations with Ernest Hemingway (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1986), 123.
109. Lief, Caldwell, and Bycel, Ladies and Gentlemen, 156.
110. McKee, Story, 105.
111. Ibid., 317–18.
112. Ibid., 319.
113. Ibid.
114. Ibid.
115. Ibid.
116. Lief, Caldwell, and Bycel, Ladies and Gentlemen, 145–46.
117. Ibid., 140.
118. Ibid., 149.
119. Ibid., 151.
120. Ibid., 154–55.
121. Ibid., 156.
122. McKee, Story, 209.
123. Peter Brooks, The Melodramatic Imagination: Balzac, Henry James, Melodrama, and the Mode of Excess (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1976), 86.
CHAPTER 4
1. David Lodge, The Art of Fiction: Illustrated from Classic and Modern Texts (New York: Penguin Books, 1992), 26.
2. John Gardner, The Art of Fiction: Notes on Craft for Young Writers (New York: Vintage Books, 1985), 6.
3. E. L. Doctorow, City of God (New York: Random House, 2000), quoted in A. O. Scott, “A Thinking Man’s Miracle,” Book Review Desk, New York Times, March 5, 2000, sec. 7.
4. The Maltese Falcon, directed by John Huston (1941).
5. Heraclitus, Heraclitus, in The Pre-Socratic Philosophers, by Geoffrey Stephen Kirk, John Earle Raven, and Malcolm Schofield (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 210–11.
6. Edith Wharton, The Writing of Fiction (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1997), 36–37.
7. Lodge, Art of Fiction, 67.
8. F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Last Tycoon (New York: Scribner’s, 1970), 163.
9. Bob Dylan, “It’s All Over Now, Baby Blue,” Bringing It All Back Home, Columbia Records, 1965.
10. Michael Roemer, Telling Stories: Postmodernism and the Invalidation of Traditional Narrative (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1995), 16–17.
11. Jerome Bruner, Making Stories: Law, Literature and Life (New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2002), 64.
12. Irwin Shaw, interview, Paris Review, no. 4, Winter 1953, available at http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/5157/the-art-of-fiction-no-4-irwin-shaw.
13. See Richard E. Nisbett and Lee Ross, Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980), 31.
14. See Lee Ross, “The Intuitive Psychologist and His Shortcomings: Distortions in the Attribution Process,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 10, ed. Leo
nard Berkowitz (New York: Academic Press, 1977), 173.
15. See Daniel T. Gilbert and Patrick S. Malone, “The Correspondence Bias,” Psychological Bulletin 117, no. 1 (1995), 21.
16. Lodge, Art of Fiction, 183.
17. Ibid.
18. E. M. Forster, Aspects of the Novel (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1954), 67.
19. Gerald Prince, A Dictionary of Narratology: rev. ed. (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2003), 31.
20. Forster, Aspects of the Novel, 67–68.
21. Ibid.
22. Ibid., 68–70.
23. Ibid., 67.
24. Prince, Dictionary of Narratology, 85.
25. Forster, Aspects of the Novel, 78.
26. Lodge, Art of Fiction, 183.
27. Ernest Hemingway, quoted in Writers at Work: The Paris Review Interviews, ed. George Plimpton (New York: Viking Press, 1963), 233.
28. Lodge, Art of Fiction, 183.
29. See Robert McKee, Story: Substance, Structure, Style, and the Principles of Screenwriting (New York: Regan Books, 1997), 104 (“The finest [screen]writing not only reveals true character, but arcs or changes [of] that [character’s] inner nature, for better or worse, over the course of the telling”).
30. Katherine Anne Porter, quoted in Plimpton, Writers at Work, 151.
31. Wharton, The Writing of Fiction, 94–95 (emphasis in original).
32. Roemer, Telling Stories, 275.
33. See Sergeant York, directed by Howard Hawks (1941); Meet John Doe, directed by Frank Capra (1941); The Pride of the Yankees, directed by Sam Wood (1942). For a discussion of Cooper’s acting career, see Advameg, Inc., “Gary Cooper—Actors and Actresses—Films as Actor, Publications,” Film Reference, http://www.film-reference.com/Actors-and-Actresses-Co-Da/Cooper-Gary.html.
34. Wharton, The Writing of Fiction, 94–95.
35. Margaret Mehring, The Screenplay: A Blend of Film, Form and Content (Boston: Focal Press, 1990), 187.
36. High Noon, directed by Fred Zinnemann (1952).
37. Peter Brooks, The Melodramatic Imagination (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1976), 16–17.
38. James Wood, How Fiction Works (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2009), 62.
39. Anthony G. Amsterdam and Philip N. Meyer, “Making Our Clients’ Stories Heard: A Guide to Narrative Strategies for Appellate and Postconviction Lawyers” (Administrative Office, U.S. Courts, 2008), 7.34.
40. Mieke Bal, Narratology: Introduction to the Theory of Narrative (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997), 43–66; Michael J. Toolan, Narrative: A Critical Linguistic Introduction (New York: Routledge, 1994), 119–37.
41. Amsterdam and Meyer, “Making Our Clients’ Stories Heard,” 7.34.
42. Ibid., 7.35.
43. Porter, quoted in Plimpton, Writers at Work, 151.
44. Ibid., 152.
45. Tobias Wolff, This Boy’s Life: A Memoir (New York: Harper and Row, 1989), 63.
46. Ibid., 87–88.
47. Ibid., 89–91.
48. Anthony G. Amsterdam and Jerome Bruner, Minding the Law (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002), 113–14.
49. Wolff, This Boy’s Life, 88.
CHAPTER 5
1. Nick Ravo, “Mafia Trial in Hartford Opens with Guilty Plea,” New York Times, May 4, 1991.
2. Edmund Mahony, “Defendant Takes Hits from Both Sides,” Hartford Courant, July 17, 1991.
3. Alix Biel, “To Wit,” Hartford Courant, May 16, 1993.
4. Jerome Bruner, Actual Minds, Possible Worlds (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986), 37.
5. Ibid., 38.
6. The strategy of redefining the story elements in the prosecution’s case is one of three primary defense strategies. According to W. Lance Bennett and Martha Feldman, the defense may “alter the interpretation of a story’s central action through challenge, redefinition, or reconstruction of the story itself.” W. Lance Bennett and Martha Feldman, Reconstructing Reality in the Courtroom: Justice and Judgment in American Culture (Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1989), 98.
7. Mahony, “Defendant Takes Hits.”
8. Transcript of Closing Argument at 6, United States v. Bianco, No. H-90-18 (AHN) (D. Conn. July 16, 1991) [hereinafter Transcript] (transcript of closing argument of Jeremiah Donovan on behalf of Louis Failla), aff’d, 998 F.2d 1112, 1128 (2d Cir. 1993).
9. Ibid., 7–8.
10. Ibid., 8.
11. Ibid.
12. Ibid., 8–9.
13. Ibid., 9.
14. Ibid.
15. Ibid., 9–10.
16. Syd Field, Screenplay: The Foundations of Screenwriting (New York: Dellacorte Press, 1982), 9.
17. Ibid., 66.
18. Transcript, 10–11.
19. Ibid., 11.
20. Ibid.
21. Mahony, “Defendant Takes Hits.”
22. Transcript, 12.
23. Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, directed by George Roy Hill (1969).
24. Transcript, 13.
25. Ibid., 14.
26. Ibid., 19–20.
27. Ibid., 22–23.
28. Ibid., 24–25.
29. Ibid., 25.
30. Ibid., 26.
31. Ibid., 41–43.
32. Mahony, “Defendant Takes Hits.”
33. Transcript, 47.
34. Ibid.
35. Ibid., 47–48.
36. Ibid., 49.
37. Ibid.
38. Ibid., 55.
39. Ibid., 56.
40. Ibid.
41. Ibid.
42. Ibid., 57.
43. Ibid., 57–58.
44. Ibid., 59.
45. Ibid.
46. Ibid.
47. Ibid.
48. Ibid., 60–61.
49. Ibid., 61.
50. Ibid., 61–62.
51. Ibid., 64.
52. Ibid., 64–65.
53. Ibid.
54. Syd Field, The Screenwriter’s Workbook (New York: Dell, 1984), 86.
55. As pointed out earlier, according to Bennett and Feldman, the defense may “alter the interpretation of a story’s central action through challenge, redefinition, or reconstruction of the story itself.” Bennett and Feldman, Reconstructing Reality, 98. The success of this strategy “depends on the defense’s ability to find a story element that is ambiguous enough to support another definition and, at the same time, central enough to the story to effect the meaning of the central action.” Ibid., 102. Here, the defense attempted to provide a counterstory with “an internally consistent interpretation of the defendant’s motives.” Ibid., 103.
56. Transcript, 75–76.
57. Ibid., 74–75. Donovan tells the jury:
You have a tougher job. In trying to determine intention, the person’s intention is necessarily very largely a matter of inference. No witness, you know, can be expected to come in here and testify that he looked into another person’s mind and saw therein a certain purpose or intention. I tried to do it with cartoons. I can’t do it. No FBI agent or expert can come in and testify what Louie’s intention was. Now how do we do it? One way in which a jury can determine what a person’s purpose and intention was at any given time is by determining what that person’s conduct was and what the circumstances were surrounding that conduct, and from these, from the conduct, to infer what his purpose or intention was. To draw such inferences is not only the privilege, but it’s the duty of the jury, provided, of course, the inference you draw is a reasonable one. Ibid.
