A Bull Persuasive Speech

Words: 1433
Pages: 6

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I would like to thank you for being taxed with the grueling process of hearing evidence, testimonies, and speculation throughout these few days. However, we are here today to decide the fate of not a man, but a boy. To convict a boy guilty of “murder in the first degree- premeditated homicide… the most serious charge tried in our criminal courts,” (Rose 5). Sentencing a boy to die in a prison, or convict him not guilty, setting him free. Ladies and gentlemen we all have our own ideas on this boy. Some of you see him as a slum kid, “[having] been hit so many times in his life that violence is a normal state of affairs,” (Rose 17), or see as born in a “breeding ground for criminals” (Rose 17). You may even see …show more content…
He claimed “at ten minutes after twelve on the night of the killing he heard loud noises… it sounded like a fight. Then he heard the kid shout ‘I’m gonna kill you!’ A second later he heard a body fall…” (Rose 15) He then stated it took “fifteen seconds,” (Rose 43) to “[run] to the door of his apartment…and [see] the kid running down the stairs,” (Rose 15). Now, let’s take into account who this eyewitness testimony is coming from. This man was clearly confused and even suffered from a stroke some time ago (Rose 43). Could this mean that his cognitive or even hearing ability could be damaged? Could he have maybe altered what he truly …show more content…
We all saw the prosecution prove it. However, the other evidence can be disproved. Firstly, the prosecution is relying greatly on the defendant clearly saying “ ‘I’m gonna kill you!’ at the top of his lungs,” (Rose ). However, how many times have you said “I’m gonna kill you!”? We say it all the time, “ I could kill you for that darling… Come on Rocky, kill him,” (Rose ) It’s become a part of our vocabulary, “We say it every day. It doesn’t mean we’re going to kill someone,” (Rose). The prosecution could also argue how the witness saw the defendant flee the crime scene, automatically framing him as not only a suspect, but the perpetrator. Earlier we stated that the man suffered from a stroke, and due to this stoke he has an injury in his leg. The man drags the leg when he walks. In order to see the defendant flee, he would have to “get up out of bed, walk twelve feet, open the bedroom door, walk forty- three feet and open the front door- all in fifteen seconds…” (Rose ). Now this man, a man who “had to be [helped] into the witness stand,” (Rose ) could not have made it to the door in time to see the defendant run away. In fact, a simulation states that it would have taken 42 seconds. (Rose ). What the defense suggests is that “the old man heard the fight between the boy and his father a few hours