Wang Zhaofeng

Director of Beijing Zhoutai Law Firm

Learn to Listen: Who to Listen To, and How to Listen

I’ve noticed that many lawyers are great at talking—but not so good at listening. As someone once said, "Speech is silver, but silence is golden." Mastering the art of silence and calmly taking the time to truly listen is, in fact, a remarkable skill.

During the investigation process, we listen to the parties involved, the clients, witnesses, and even the investigating unit. The information we gather must then be carefully analyzed and utilized. As the saying goes, "Hearing widely leads to clarity," so by obtaining information from as many sources as possible, we can ensure our assessment of the case comes as close as possible to the true facts.

In investigative work, "listening" must always revolve around the elements that constitute the crime. Therefore, it’s crucial to prepare thoroughly before listening. For instance, if a witness is likely to provide critical details about a key aspect of the case, you should first anticipate exactly what information you’ll need from them—and then craft relevant questions tailored specifically to elicit those answers.

Before listening, be good at breaking the ice—build rapport and close the distance between you and the other person. If necessary, take small, empathetic steps to deepen your connection. Secondly, learn to take notes: as you speak and jot down key points, the other person will feel respected, making it easier for you to gather the information you’re after.

Learning to Read: What to Read, and How to Read

What should you read? First and foremost, study the case files. These files are our primary source of information—and they form the very foundation of your defense. In addition to thoroughly reviewing the case files, make sure to also delve into relevant statutes, precedents, and legal principles.

How do you read it? And among the many stacked case files, how can you quickly access the essential case information? Start by reviewing the comprehensive materials first—such as the "Indictment Opinion" and the "Indictment"—since these documents provide both the main parties involved and the detailed facts and charges, giving you a clear overview of what the case is all about. For more specific materials, prioritize examining testimonial evidence before physical evidence, as testimonial evidence reveals people’s thoughts and logic, helping you piece together the entire story coherently.

When reviewing verbal evidence, start with the statements of the defendant and the victim. For the defendant, examine the first and last testimonies first. If these initial and final accounts remain largely consistent and stable, you can temporarily skip over the intermediate statements. However, if discrepancies arise between the early and later parts, pinpoint exactly when and where the changes began—and investigate thoroughly why those shifts occurred. If possible, directly question the parties involved to understand the reasons behind the inconsistencies. When analyzing the victim’s testimony, identify any contradictions between their account and that of the defendant. Once these contradictions are pinpointed, delve deeper by examining how witnesses addressed the same issues in their own statements.

In short, we need to look outward from the center. When multiple people are involved in various activities, take a moment to assess each one clearly—never act blindly.

During the review process, use a comparative approach and promptly document any contradictions that arise between pieces of evidence. Our usual practice involves extracting key documents—reducing the thickness of numerous case files to make retrieval much more convenient.

Learning to Write: Who to Write For, and How to Do It

First, you need to clearly identify who you’re writing for. Tailor your content to the audience and ensure the language aligns with their level of expertise. For instance, if the material is intended for non-experts, use simple, straightforward language that’s easy to understand. On the other hand, when drafting documents for leaders, keep it concise and to the point—make sure to clearly outline the issue at hand, highlight any problems, and emphasize exactly what actions or decisions require the leader’s attention and resolution, all within as few words as possible. But here’s a key reminder: if you’re writing for a judge, don’t assume they’ll appreciate lengthy explanations. If you submit a three-page document on a complex case, the judge’s first impression might be that you’re being careless—or worse, that your legal knowledge is surprisingly shallow, given how basic your language appears. After all, judges expect precision and depth, not overly simplistic prose. In short, always consider your audience before putting pen to paper.

Another issue is how to write it. First, your central idea and viewpoint must be clear from the very beginning—state your position upfront, laying it out plainly right from the start. Second, ensure that your narrative follows a logical structure, whether it’s chronological logic or causal logic. In terms of chronological logic, simply stick to the sequence of events, explaining the causes and effects as they unfold over time. For causal logic, organize your points according to their importance or significance—for instance, if someone is accused of three different charges, highlight the one you believe poses the greatest problem or has the most far-reaching impact at the outset, saving the less critical details for later in the piece.

We know that human attention is limited, and we tend to remember the beginning and end more clearly and vividly. Therefore, it’s important to state the most crucial points first—whether presenting multiple facts, start with the most significant one; or when listing several charges, highlight the most serious ones upfront. Additionally, make sure your message is clear and well-articulated.

The writing must be clear and concise—avoid archaic or convoluted language that leaves readers confused. Every sentence and every point you make should be backed by solid evidence. Only then can you craft an article that is both thought-provoking and easy to follow, with a strong central argument, logical flow, precise expectations, and polished prose.

Learn to say: What’s the purpose, and how to say it

First, clearly define the purpose of your speech. If it’s meant to reassure, think about which words will resonate with the listener and make them feel cared for. If you’re aiming to uncover an issue, outline your questions beforehand—decide carefully what to ask first and what to follow up with. And if your goal is to refute an argument, back it up with solid evidence, drawing on facts, legal principles, and even emotional reasoning. Finally, there’s persuasion—most notably seen in court, where speakers rely on cross-examination and courtroom debates to make their case.

How should I put it? In court, I avoid reading out my defense altogether—because doing so would simply waste precious "organs." After all, God gave us eyes, ears, a mouth, and even hands for a reason. If I just stand there reciting my arguments, all I’ll achieve is letting others hear my voice—but that doesn’t guarantee they’ve truly absorbed or understood my points. If I notice the judge isn’t convinced—or perhaps hasn’t even fully grasped my perspective—I’ll adjust on the spot, shifting to a different approach to address the issue. That way, I might just capture his attention and make him more open to listening. After all, it’s not enough to rely solely on my voice; I also need to maintain steady eye contact, using nonverbal cues to keep him engaged and connected throughout the conversation.

Often, you can tell whether someone supports your point of view—or even if they’re open to hearing it—simply by observing their eye contact. The same goes for gestures: we use them to express agreement or disagreement, and gestures can also help emphasize what’s truly important.

So, in court, we need to use our language in a comprehensive and strategic way.      

Author: Wang Zhaofeng

Source: Ten Conversations on Criminal Defense