This paper relates to recent discussions in narrative research focusing on the actual everyday practices of participants when telling and taking up stories. The field of practice under consideration is that of criminal case work. First, the paper introduces very briefly the status of narrating in criminal case work. Second, it discusses the double meaning of positioning and positionality used in this paper. After introducing the data and the broader methodological context of the underlying fieldwork, it will show how in lawyer-client meetings narratives are called upon and cited in order to achieve a coherent strategy understandable to both lawyer and client. The purpose of the paper is more a theoretical-conceptual than an empirical one. It wants to show that in criminal case work narrative is on the one hand a central means to establish plausibility while on the other hand most of the time told in fragments.