Based on an actual trial:
A lawyer is defending a man for murder and is delivering his summation to the jury: " Ladies & gentlemen. The prosecution MUST show guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. There were no eye-witnesses to this supposed murder. There was no weapon recovered. The body of Jesse Sample was never recovered.The only reason my client is on trial is because he was last person seen with the supposed victim and they had argued in the past. Only one witness; Mary Dupont; who admitted she broke off her engagement to my client so she could marry
Mr. Sample ; a woman of doubtful virtue as she herself admitted; claimed that she heard my client threaten the life of the alleged deceased.
Well, ever since my client retained me I have have spent hours looking for Mr.Sample and I can tell you today; my investigators have found him and have brought him to this courthouse and will be bringing him through that door; RIGHT NOW ! ".
All eyes of the jury, the judge, the prosecutor and the audience turned and stared at the door of the courtroom. After a long dramatic pause the defense attorney spoke again:
" I admit I just played a trick on you. We haven't found Jesse Sample and we don't know where he is. But ALL of you looked at that door expecting and waiting for him to walk right in. THAT ! ladies and gentlemen is 'reasonable doubt'. It's just as possible Jesse Sample is still alive as that he was murdered. And it's precisely why you must aquit my client. Thank you. "
After the prosecutor half-heartedly summed up and the judge instructed the jury with extra emphasis on "reasonable doubt" the jury went to deliberate. Everyone expected an aquittal.The defendant hugged and thanked his attorney. The prosecutor slumped in his seat. After less than an hour the jury came back and pronounced their verdict : "Guilty of Murder".
The verdict was correct. The defendant had murdered the victim and disposed of the body so that it was never found. How did they know ?





Bookmarks