Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 314 views

    Mock Trial Closing Arguments

    Uploaded by

    Sebastian Singh
    This document is the closing argument from the defense attorney in a trial regarding contamination of a water supply. The attorney summarizes that the prosecution's witnesses were biased, including a farmer suing the defendant, a documentary filmmaker who would benefit from negative publicity, and a disgruntled former employee. In contrast, the defense provided expert witnesses in business, hydraulic fracturing, and environmental safety. The attorney argues that reasonable doubt exists, as the likely sources of contamination were a diesel spill on a nearby farm and a fired former employee, not the actions of the defendant company. The defense asks for all charges to be dismissed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Mock Trial Closing Arguments

    Uploaded by

    Sebastian Singh
    314 views2 pages
    This document is the closing argument from the defense attorney in a trial regarding contamination of a water supply. The attorney summarizes that the prosecution's witnesses were biased, including a farmer suing the defendant, a documentary filmmaker who would benefit from negative publicity, and a disgruntled former employee. In contrast, the defense provided expert witnesses in business, hydraulic fracturing, and environmental safety. The attorney argues that reasonable doubt exists, as the likely sources of contamination were a diesel spill on a nearby farm and a fired former employee, not the actions of the defendant company. The defense asks for all charges to be dismissed.

    Original Description:

    Summation NYS mock trial 2014

    Original Title

    Mock Trial closing arguments

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is the closing argument from the defense attorney in a trial regarding contamination of a water supply. The attorney summarizes that the prosecution's witnesses were biased, including a farmer suing the defendant, a documentary filmmaker who would benefit from negative publicity, and a disgruntled former employee. In contrast, the defense provided expert witnesses in business, hydraulic fracturing, and environmental safety. The attorney argues that reasonable doubt exists, as the likely sources of contamination were a diesel spill on a nearby farm and a fired former employee, not the actions of the defendant company. The defense asks for all charges to be dismissed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    314 views2 pages

    Mock Trial Closing Arguments

    Uploaded by

    Sebastian Singh
    This document is the closing argument from the defense attorney in a trial regarding contamination of a water supply. The attorney summarizes that the prosecution's witnesses were biased, including a farmer suing the defendant, a documentary filmmaker who would benefit from negative publicity, and a disgruntled former employee. In contrast, the defense provided expert witnesses in business, hydraulic fracturing, and environmental safety. The attorney argues that reasonable doubt exists, as the likely sources of contamination were a diesel spill on a nearby farm and a fired former employee, not the actions of the defendant company. The defense asks for all charges to be dismissed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Your honor, this courtroom has seen many things this evening.

    We have seen two sides of a


    story , the story is about the contamination of molivars water supply. This evening weve heard of three
    different spills, ANY one of which could be the source of the contamination. You have been presented a
    case with a clear bias. The case you were presented today by the prosecution featured three witnesses:
    A new farmer who spilled diesel on his own land, who is also suing the defendant in a separate cival suit;
    a novice documentary director who if the defendant WERE(?) found guilty would greatly benefit due to
    the great publicity his film would receive; and finally a disgruntled former employee of PennHydraGas
    who is clearly resentful for having been let go. These characters, for lack of a better word, are the cream
    of the crop, the witnesses the prosecution wished to utilize more than any others.
    Your honor, this evening you were presented the same story again by the defense. WE have
    provided you with three witnesses: a successful business owner who utilizes safe business practices;
    an engineer competent in hydraulic fracturing; and finally An expert in the field of environmental study
    and ecological safety. We have provided with you with tangible evidence namely a map and scientific
    publication.
    And Now Your honor, I must remind you of the facts of this case. I must remind you that
    MacDonald spilled diesel on his own land. I must remind you that Diesel fluid is made of diesel possibly
    the diesel spilled on the farm; water which is used on a farm for many things; and sand which is
    commonly used in irrigating water on a farm. I must remind you that Bobbie Jones was FIRED from
    PennHydraGas for sleeping on the job.
    Your honor I must remind you that the prosecution has presented you with characters, film
    producers, new farmers, laid off workers; and I must remind you that we the defense have provided you
    with professionals. Your honor at this time I must remind you that we have provided you with Mitchell
    Tomley; a successful woman competent beyond belief and one who cares about progress of not only her
    company but also the communities in which her company works; I must remind you we have provided
    you with Billie Jo Simplayton, a business woman with great experience with fracking; I must remind you
    that we have provided you with Shawn Marshall who testified to the plausibility of the prosecutions
    allegations.
    Your Honor I must remind you that to rule my client PennHydraGas Guilty, you must be certain beyond
    the shadow of a doubt that they violated the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. And Your honor I am
    certain that that shadow has been cast. The shadow was cast when it was revealed that Mickie
    Macdonald spilled diesel on her own farm. The shadow was cast when we learned that diesel fluid and
    diesel fuel are essentially the same. Your honor I remind you, nay I must remind you that the farm is
    scientifically too far from the drilling site, by a factor of 9.The shadow was cast when we learned that
    Bobbie Jones was fired from PennHydraGas. Your honor, I stand to tell you Doubts shadow has been
    cast, and that shadow is so great it eclipses this case. Your honor , we the defence ask that you dismiss
    all charges that PennHydraGas has violated section 71-4001 of the new York state safe drinking water
    act, as the people of New York and the esteemed counsel representing them have not met the
    nessesary burden of proof. Thank-you your honor, the defense rests.

    You might also like