Is Anybody Out There?

Sometimes, I think I talk to hear myself speak (Some of you may think that occurs more often than not, but we'll stick with "sometimes").  When I tell a client that their spouse will forever follow them to find dirt to change custody so they need to keep their noses absolutely clean, why don't they listen?  When I tell them they need to change their behavior in a specific way for a significant period before we go to trial, why don't they?  When I tell them a certain line of argument will blow up in their faces, why do they insist I make it anyway?  I know, these are all rhetorical questions, but sometimes I just need to ask.  Most of us here in the Trenches have toiled here for a long time.  We know what impresses judges, evaluators, and other decision makers, and what just ticks them off.  That's because we have tried multiple cases in front of those folks, or have a colleague who has done so.  We know how certain facts and arguments will look to a third party.  Clients pay us to put forth their best argument, to help them convince the trier of fact of the ultimate justice of their cause.  We're able to do that not only because of our knowledge of the law, but also our knowledge of the courts, and our ability to view the facts in a rational manner, unclouded by emotion.  Some clients pay us a lot of money to do just that, so it's hard to understand why they don't take the advice for which they pay.  It never turns out well for them when they don't, and yet, time and time again, we go to trial only to have the client tell us when it's over that should have taken our advice and done what we told them to do to prepare.  Wouldn't it have been easier to simply heed it from the beginning/  Yes, that's another rhetorical question, but one that needs asking - here in the Trenches.