MY CASE (8) THE CLOSING SPEECH

Must take this carefully.

Truth is – a lot of barristers are stuffed shirts – have never mastered the art of being likeable as well as persuasive. Too much up their own arses to be real, normal and human. They prefer to sound like barristers – educated chaps; addressing a jury in a reserved and distant manner.

I don’t like that.

Better to win people over with a bit of wit – a touch of eloquence – some magic and charm. Of course the meat of the matter is the evidence but the delivery is the sugar that sweetens the pill.

Let the boring buggers be boring – Mr P is never that. Dullness don’t win votes on a jury.

Anyway.

In a criminal trial before a jury – I always start with a mantra:

“The defendant doesn’t have to prove anything – the prosecution brings this case and they must prove it beyond a reasonable doubt so that you are sure….sure….that the defendant is guilty of this crime. You must not rely on gut feeling, or a mere sense of guilt, but must look to the evidence. That evidence can be direct or circumstantial. You must rely on the evidence and the evidence must support the prosecution case so that you are sure of this man’s guilt. You cannot leave an important case like this to chance, there is too much at stake.”

I always kick off with that stuff – a jury might not necessarily know it. The judge will include this in his summing up – but it sounds better from me.

I then rabbited on about how difficult a teacher’s job has become – how society has seen deterioration in standards of behaviour – the lack of respect – the rise in knife crime – blah…blah…. It’s all true – all verbiage bollocks – but it would have a profound effect on a sensible jury.

Most ordinary folks would support a teacher, and I make it clear that I support all of the teachers who gave evidence in this court.

I then remind them of this kid’s behaviour – unprovoked – the foul words that were spoken (I say them again....and observe the jury grimacing). I say that this is the sort of thing teachers have to put up with everyday…they need and deserve our support.

And here’s the important bit: the summary of my main points – I signpost them right at the start – give them titles – headings – and take each in turn slowly. I say – I have THREE main issues – THREE – and they are simple points – here they are:

1. Being hurled to the floor;
2. Being grabbed around the neck;
3. The evidence of the boy.

I watch as the jury members write the three issues down – and underline them on their pads. Then they wait….patiently for me to start with issue number one. It’s there blinking at them on their writing paper – the paper demands words.

I am winning already. They are with me – I am simple – at their level – I am one of them.

Point One: Being hurled to the floor

I detonate my bombs throughout.

Who saw what happened?

One teacher only…..nobody else….and he was standing 200 yards away (of course he bloody wasn’t ! he was 20 yards away…..but was too hard headed to correct his error….and the prosecution were as dim as a 10 watt light-bulb to take issue with it).

And he says he saw – the lad (who was 10 1/2 stone and 5’ 5”) being hurled through the air backwards but miraculously sustained no injuries to the back of his head. It cannot be true, and I point at the defendant – “look at the defendant – he’s not a big man – not a latter day Arnold Swarzeneger (bit cheesy I know) – to have done this – he needed a piece of magic or Herculean strength. It just didn’t happen – how could it have? We must reject this evidence, as being entirely implausible.”

“Ultimately – it’s his word against the defendant’s – a 50/50 scenario – not enough to convict this man. What can tip the balance? The evidence of the boy himself”. See later…..


BING-AND-A-BOOM!


Point Two: Being grabbled around the neck

The evidence was that it’s easy with a struggling and lunatic kid to lose grip and to momentarily fall outside of “Team Teach”. There were no markings around the neck. The headmaster confirmed the fallibility of the Team Teach system.


Point Three: The evidence of the boy

And I read out his statement – slowly. The statement does not say that the teacher attacked him but it says it was an accident.....


ALL SIMPLE ….COMPELLING STUFF.

Finally

P appeals to their common-bloody-sense, and what a guilty verdict will mean for society:

A kid kicks off – trashes the room and attacks a teacher….and..THE TEACHERS GETS PUT INSIDE……NOT THE KID.

The kid swaggers off – boasting to his mates.

What a symbol of our society – what a message…...what a mess.

We must resist this at all costs.

END OF SPEECH.


The judge sums up the evidence fairly.

AND OUT GO THE JURY

Oh- the prosecution did a krap, erudite and dull closing speech....