Derren Brown: Archive
| Message ID: 03537 | [ Previous ] [ Next ] [ Up Thread ] |
From: ganetauk
Date: Thu Mar 20, 2003 12:56am
Subject: Re: Hypnosis & The Legal Profession
Of course...there are people who simply bung the judge £5000 :o) lol
(if you do this, you should anchor the judge as you hand over the
money...this primes him for any other cases. Fire ya anchor and "zap"
the judge will think he/she has already been paid :o) - this is
standard stuff lol :o))))
oh you should add an "ecology check"....in other words....check no
one is around as you do the deal :o)
Terry nlp (naughty little people ) :oP
--- In a previous message killerb_0187 wrote:
> Great explanation Terry.
>
> Anchoring is the 'new form' of Classical Conditioning.
> When a natural stimulus, e.g. a door closing, or someone doing up
> their watch) + Unconditioned response = Conditioned Response.
>
> Anchoring works in exactly the same way, the only major difference
is
> it doesn't take very long with anchoring, and the new forms of
> communication and embedded command that you can use with it.
>
> In a court room situation, everything would have to be done
covertly.
> When on the opposition talking about a defendant you could talk the
> double binds as Terry pointed out, while gesturing with your left
> hand.
>
> So, bad comments = left hand
>
> When putting your comments accross, you could gesture with your
right
> hand.
>
> So, comments which you want enforced = Right hand
>
> (i hope this isn't patronising, i'm trying to make it easy to
> understand).
>
>
> Then you can 'mismatch' with the gestures. So, when saying
something
> seemingly nice like "I'm sure he won't commit such and such again",
> GESTURE WITH LEFT HAND. You'll be enforcing that you're diplomatic
at
> the conscious level to the juror's, but at the unconscious level
all
> the bad feelings you have elicited will become remisicent to them.
>
> Hope this helps any would-be lawyers, and people who wanna just
> communicate better. --- In a previous message ganetauk wrote:
> > Influence/hypnotis techniques are used by MANY. Even to the use
of
> > specific colours when using diagrams etc. Using closed
questioning
> > techniques, anchoring and psychological framing IS used...
> >
> > Psychological research indicates that human beings intuitively
> > utilize a highly schematic approach to assimilate, comprehend,
> store,
> > and retrieve information—and that the "story" format is the most
> > universally popular (and efficient) "schema" for these purposes.
A
> > good trial story and theme work hand-in-hand to lock the jurors
> into
> > a basic understanding of the primary case issues. The
trial "story"
> > incorporates the primary thematic message and neatly outlines all
> of
> > the case facts in a chronological, step-by-step fashion. Jurors
> then
> > subconsciously use the theme to look for evidence that "fits" the
> > carefully constructed trial story, and to disregard evidence that
> > does not.
> >
> > It is essential that the attorney employ an engaging and credible
> > trial story that involves a clear beginning, middle, and end,
along
> > with a compelling trial theme, to persuade jurors regarding the
> case.
> >
> > It is not surprising that two colorful Southerners with down-
home,
> > deep-fried, country styles—former Sen. Dale Bumpers—D-Arkansas
and
> > Rep. Lindsay Graham, R-South Carolina—got the biggest laughs
during
> > President Clinton's recent impeachment trial in the Senate. Mr.
> > Bumpers broke up his former Senate colleagues when he said: "If
> > someone tells you this is not about money, it's about money."
> Equally
> > funny was Rep. Graham when he commented on one of President
> Clinton's
> > late-night phone calls to Monica Lewinsky: "Back where I came
from,
> > when someone calls you at 2:00 A.M., they're up to no good."
> >
> > Colorful, even whimsical, language is almost always far more
> > memorable and has a much stronger impact on jurors than run-of-
the-
> > mill, tired verbiage. Whenever you can, try to dress up your
> > courtroom oratory with vivid and bright words and phrases to get
> the
> > jurors on your side.
> >
> > Use of Double–Binds
> >
> > Characterizing the opposition in "either–or" terms that are both
> > negative is an effective way to minimize juror sympathy for the
> > opposition—for example, "did the plaintiff injure himself because
> he
> > was inattentive, or because he was careless?"
> >
> > "Classically-conditioning" jurors
> >
> > An extremely effective NLP technique attorneys can use in
the
> > courtroom involves the "classic-conditioning" of jurors at a
> > subconscious level during the trial. "Classically-conditioning"
> > jurors is not to be confused with the often employed practice of
> > trying to "condition" jurors during voir dire. This approach
> involves
> > employing voir dire questions to attempt to baldly maneuver
jurors
> so
> > as to get them to pre-commit to a desired point of view— "If I am
> > able to successfully prove ______________, you understand you
will
> > then be required to determine the case in favor of my client,
don't
> > you?"
> >
> > This wrongheaded "conditioning" approach is disliked by
> jurors,
> > who almost always see right through it. (Judges don't like it
> > either.) Jurors resent being forced to agree to one-sided
> conditions
> > regarding how they must decide the case prior to actual courtroom
> > presentations. Most will dig in their heels as a result. It is no
> > surprise that such ham-handed juror "conditioning" seldom works.
> >
> > "Classic-conditioning" jurors is a far more subtle yet
> > infinitely more effective approach. It involves conditioned
> > (Pavlovian) responses. In Pavlov's celebrated experiments, a bell
> > would ring at the same time that test subjects (dogs) were being
> fed.
> > It was not long before the ringing of the bell alone would cause
> the
> > dogs to salivate—the famous "conditioned" response. By using a
> > similar "classic-conditioning" approach, jurors can also quickly
be
> > taught to unconsciously react as if on cue to an unspoken message
> > that travels directly to their subconscious minds.
> >
> > The "classic-conditioning" of individuals in no way
represents
> a
> > flaky or hocus-pocus ritual. Indeed, this proven process has been
> > widely used for years by respected therapists, behavior
> modification
> > counselors, and similar professionals to persuade and influence
> their
> > clients. It is simple to implement yet guaranteed to positively
> > impact jurors if handled correctly.
> >
> > Here's how it works
> >
> > The practitioner utilizes a highly specific and easily
> > discernible action or gesture (termed a positive behavioral
anchor)
> > every time he or she references the case's most compelling and
> > positive fact (pivotal point). Let's say the case's pivotal point
> is
> > that the defendant, a manufacturer, went to extra special lengths
> to
> > inform customers regarding the safe use of the company's product.
> > Every time the attorney discusses this vital defense fact, he or
> she
> > makes sure to simultaneously employ the same specific and clearly
> > perceived gesture or action.
> >
> > The gesture could be touching the lips, grabbing the hands
> > together, grasping a chin, bowing the head, or knotting a tie. It
> is
> > essential that the gesture appear natural and unrehearsed, and it
> > must be done clearly and unambiguously so it can be easily
noticed
> by
> > the jurors within the full range of their peripheral vision.
> >
> > Thanks to regular repetition, the gesture or action will
> quickly
> > become strongly associated with the attorney's most telling point—
> the
> > manufacturer did everything but send the customers smoke signals
> > regarding the safe use of the product. Soon the gesture-stimulus
> > alone will automatically retrieve this highly positive defense
> point
> > in the consciousness of each and every juror. This means the
> attorney
> > can put the jurors instantaneously in touch with this compelling
> > defense message at any point throughout the trial by simply
> repeating
> > the gesture-stimulus. The autonomic nervous system response among
> > jurors will spontaneously take place like clockwork!
> >
> >
> > you decide, but don't let me influence you....
> >
> > regards Terryerryrreterryrret
> >
> >
> > --- In a previous message luise_f wrote:
> > >
> > > Is it reasonably common for barristers to aquaint themselves
with
> > > hypnotic technique? It would make sense, obviously, but
ethically?
