Updated sporadically! Guaranteed!

Sunday, November 20, 2005

Closing Arguments

Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, you have only one decision you could possibly reach and that is simply that my client is innocent.

My client barely knew the women who was killed that night. He concedes that he may have had sex with her once or fourteen times...but he never even knew her last name! Wouldn't you think someone would bother to learn a person's last name before bludgeoning that person to death? I would!

Not that I would bludgeon anyone to death. I'm just saying.

I may have dropped the ball a little on the whole fingerprint evidence thing. I truly thought our fingerprint "expert" was an actual expert. As it turns out, Tom Hanks actually had nothing to do with this event and we sincerely apologize for inferring that it did.

Believe me, that is the last time I let my cousin Frank talk me into using one of his "expert" poker buddies. But I digress.

Sure, the prosecution has thrown "DNA" evidence at you to place my client at the scene of the tragedy. But what is this "DNA" anyway?

Have you ever seen any "DNA"? I haven't. I don't know what it looks like, what it symbolizes, what it's hopes and dreams are. I don't even know what party this elusive "DNA" even votes for. And in this time of great turmoil in our country, I'd like to know which side this "DNA" is on: us or them. Know what I mean?

Additionally, my client makes some damn fine macramé art. That ought to count for something. Ever heard of a murderer who works in macramé? Nope. Me neither.

Across the board, the prosecution has completely failed to make their case.

Except for the fingerprint stuff.

And that whole "DNA" thing, which I am still pretty skeptical about and I believe you should be, too.

In any case, remember the macramé.

Macramé.

You must acquit.

Macramé.

Comments :

0 comments to “Closing Arguments”

Post a Comment

Related Posts with Thumbnails