There are times when a client comes into me and tells me what I think is a lie. Sometimes exposing that lie in advance is in my client's best interests and in other times my client is better off not revealing the truth.

There are lies that people tell that other people would normally think were lies, but wouldn't challenge them on them. It's hard to give a good example, but it's the sort of thing where normally you would think to yourself, "Yes, this person is probably lying, but it's not worth my time or effort to expose it. If I did they would just deny it, and it wouldn't be worth the arguing." You may think slightly less of the person for their alleged deception, but overall it just isn't worth the time to expose. And so when people tell those lies, they think they are being believed, and they think that they have a good lie.

The problem is that in the court context, if I as their attorney get that feeling, then probably the finder of fact is going to get the same feeling, and it will harm my client's credibility. The other attorney will go to great lengths to bring the evidence to expose the lie.

So I don't tell my clients that I think they are lying. I tell them that the court is going to have a hard time believing that assertion without something to back it up. In short, before we say it in court, we need to be able to verify it and back it up with extra facts. So before I even make the assertion in court, I make a few phone calls, get my client to come up with some witnesses who will say the same thing. 99% of the time I'm right, and there not only isn't anything backing up the lie, there is something that outright contradicts it. And then I make it clear to my clients that if I can find it, the other side can find it, and while they may still stand by their position, they may want to emphasize other parts of their case instead.

The second type of lie is the promise. "If given the opportunity, I will do X", when in fact the client has absolutely no intention of doing X. I can't have a client say "I will do X" if they have secretly told me "there ain't no way I will do X". Frequently though, it's that I'm reading body language and have a grasp on their personality. In those cases as long as they are saying "I will do X", my job is convince the factfinder that in fact they will do X. I may not trust them, and I may not believe them, but I don't "know" that they won't do X. I'm an advocate, and my role is to put them in as positive a light as I possibly can. My adversary's job is to put my client in as bad a light as possible, and presumably if they've done their job right the factfinder will see what is going on. It's not my job to do the factfinding or make the ultimate ruling on whether they will do "X". Still, it's difficult at times to sit there and have a client be believed, and be thinking personally, "What are you nuts? Can't you see that not in a million years will this individual follow through with the promise?"