Insert Surname 1

Name
Institution
Course
Instructor
Date
AP Government Mock Trial Assignment: Defendant closing statement
Thank you for your attention ladies and gentlemen of the jury, in this exceptional case. A
serious offense faces my client. He is charged with aggravating and harassing Mr. Walker. Both
Mr. Walker and Mr. Stein share the same dorm, are in freshman year and share the same
criminology class. These aspects show how that my client was accused on facts based on
coincidences and emotions instead of facts. The case lacks physical evidence since the provided
evidence argue that Mr. Walker received his first threatening message on October 10th from an
unknown person who used the name SirVive and the messages did not cease until October
22nd. He received these emails from the library computer and the last mail sent on that day was
accompanied by a dead rat. The core concept here is that an unknown person sent the emails.
Many of you may argue that no one had a reason to threaten the complainant except my
client because both had encountered each other on October 2nd and 3rd , but the issue was not
personal. My client teased him and made a little finger gun and shot at him, which meant nothing
much than a joke. He also nicknamed him jammer, which meant nothing much. Ideally, my client
loves fun and jokes, they are part of his character; hence, the encounter between the two formed
no basic platform for the threatening emails that the complainant met later.
Most of you may also ask how the username SirVive, which is my clients username,
was used in the threatening emails. The fact that my client uses the nickname SurVive in the
public computer library does not guarantee that my client is the real sender of the threatening
emails. This is his case because my client is a fun loving person and he has on several occasions
joked about this username and even shared its passwords with his friends since the username and
the password are not used for any important thing except for checking various assignments and
updates. For this reason, has the prosecution concerned the possibilities that anyone among his
friends could have used the username to send the threatening emails?
To seal it all your honor, the last threatening email that was accompanied by a dead rat,
and the Complainant affirms that he received it on October 22nd at 2 pm. This assertion
contradicts the fact that the accused person is the culprit because, during this period, my client
was in a meeting with Mr. Arthur, the professor of computer sciences. The meeting lasted for one
hour, yet the email was sent at the same time through the public computer terminal in the library.
Dont you agree with me that the presented evidence is just circumstantial and that the
investigators would have done a more thorough job? The investigators would have opted to
invite proficient information technology (IT) experts so as to find out the real sender of the
threatening messages, but they did not. Instead, the investigators relied on mere coincidences that
occurred between two warring colleagues. Dont my client deserve better? I believe he does.

Insert Surname 2
Conviction, in this case, would be an extreme pretense. Therefore, the prosecutors should do the
right thing always.