A.Trigub told how to properly construct the closing speech and the last word

The attention of the court is not unlimited. And here we are talking not only about the ability to perceive information by a person, but also about certain procedural norms, as well as organizational nuances associated with the consideration of cases in court. That is why the correctness of the tactics of the speeches of the defense (the defense lawyer during the debate and the accused with the last word) can be of key importance for the content of the verdict.

What should be said to the court and what lawyer and his client should be silent about  - these issues were covered by the associate partner of Skliarenko, Sydorenko and Partners, Andriy Trigub in the course "Strategy and tactics: building a line of defense in court" at the School of Criminal Practice of the Legal High School educational platform.

The lawyer advises to distinguish two parts for oneself in court hearings: verbal and written. The first is to provide comments on all the arguments of the prosecution that are worthy of attention. The second is to provide a list of specific arguments that the court must assess.

At the same time, the form of information presentation should be not so much narrative as interrogative. Of course, the defender should keep the attention of the judges. Moreover, for this, it is necessary to have one or several key arguments that provide confidence in the legal position formed in the case. You should speak clearly and confidently, avoiding empty and formulaic phrases, pathos and emotional value judgments.

It is optimal if you manage to invest your speech in a period of time from 10 to 20 minutes. After all, this is exactly how much, as practice shows, judges are able to concentrate attention and constructively perceive information.

If in court hearings the defense attorney focuses on the legal aspects of the proceedings, then his client in the last word of the accused should focus on the moments of the human dimension of the case. Therefore, he can talk about the motives of behavior or lack of intent, the prerequisites of events, characterize his relationship with the victim, express his attitude to compensation for harm.

From the procedural side, it is necessary to take into account that the emergence of new information in the framework of the judicial debate or during the last word can throw the process to the previous stages and drag out the case.

So, in court hearings, it is allowed to refer only to the evidence that was examined in the court session (Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code). And if at this stage it becomes necessary to present new evidence, the court will be forced to restore the clarification of the circumstances established in the course of the criminal proceedings and verify them with evidence. Thereafter, the debate will be reopened on further investigated circumstances.

When the accused in the last word (Article 365 of the Criminal Procedure Code) informs about new circumstances, the court, if these circumstances are significant, on its own initiative or at the request of the participants in the proceedings, will also be forced to restore the clarification of these circumstances. Then the court hearings are held again, after which the accused again receives the last word.