I'm in the process of preparing for my final in Trial Advocacy tomorrow. By preparing, I mean entering the depths of dispair because of Derrek Lee's broken wrist, serving a motion for fist fight on one the two opposing counsel because this specific learned counsel really pisses me off (so what if I have six inches and 50 lbs on her?), and gathering thoughts on what I am going to say for my closing argument.
It's a murder trial (my second for the year) with pretty much the same set of facts as the last trial. I think the close I am going for will be something like:
"Ladies and gentlemen, I'm sorry for you having had to listen to the State's bloviation for this long. You've heard of fancy terms like "mens rea" and "pre-meditated" and "shot the unarmed victim from ten feet away," but they can't throw those fancy legal terms out at you without some sort of guidance.
So, let's take a pitchfork to the State's 'What 'Justice' Is' rhetoric and look at the facts of this case: It's true that my client is a convicted felon. For aggravated assault. Of a handicap baseball coach.
But you heard theimpeachedtrustworthy character witness say, "He wouldn't hurt a fly."
It's true that he was carrying an unlicensed and concealed .38 Special for "protection." Further, it is true that the deceased, was not carrying a weapon. But come on. He didn't mean to kill him. He only shot him once! He had five bullets left over. And he didn't mean to stand over the body for a while, glaring at the dude he just shot. Nor should you read anything into the fact that he ran away when people from the bar that he was frequenting starting approaching.
These facts don't portray a murderer. The evidence simply isn't there. Society doesn't punish the victims, society punishes the bully. And my client was a victim."
|