Essay about Charles I of England and Fair Legal Trial

Submitted By MasterZazu
Words: 742
Pages: 3

Defence Council For King Charles I
The Trial of King Charles of the first was a complete mockery of the legal system, and the people of England. For lack of better words this was more of an grand show for the people rather than a just and fair legal trial. Firstly King Charles I was being charged with a crime that did not exist at the time it was supposedly committed. No King had ever been accused of betraying his people, and as a King who ruled by Divine Right there was no power in the land superior to him other than God. Furthermore what this parliament is doing is illegal and is contradicting the very law`s it is bond by oath to uphold. This outlaw Oliver Cromwell has a vendetta for King Charles and wishes to see his head in his hands with the almighty crown with it. He is nothing but a corrupt outlaw seeking immense power. The proceedings of this trial have failed to follow the laws instituted to deal with situations like such. The defendant was not told his crimes upon arrest which is illegal to arrest any freeman without just reason. King Charles I also was not allowed to speak on his behalf to prove his innocence, the court room was full of puritans were against the King. "No learned lawyer will affirm that an impeachment can lie against the King... one of their maxims is, that the King can do no wrong." Charles asked "I would know by what power I am called hither. I would know by what authority, I mean lawful". The parliament has no jurisdiction to bring the King into question , the only man who may judge the King is God himself. As well King Charles I was not given proper time to prepare a counter argument against the prosecutors case, there was no defence team allowed to speak on behalf of the King, this trial simply consisted of John Cook shouting false allegations at the King with no substantial evidence to back the claims. Also without a plea , it is illegal for the trial to take place, yet this jury and its members have allowed it to continue.

There is no real basis as to why King Charles is being attacked here, there is no moral basis of justice being served, every law imaginable of due process has been violated, leaving this parliament with no real power or authority to prosecute the King. Out of the 135 appointed judges to oversee this trial , the most prominent men declined the invitation and only 68 of the so-called second-string ever turned up to witness the trial of the man they were to pass judgement on, which led Charles to mockingly declare that “he did but recognize but eight of them”. From the video we can see that the jury has no intention of seeking justice here , they simply want a reason to separate the…