I had to read it twice before I realized that the speaker was the prosecutor and not a defense attorney going for a pity or insanity verdict, but its definitely an interesting set-up and your word choices are really powerful.

I like how until the end of the first speech we can’t tell whether the lawyer was a prosecutor or a defence lawyer. I could tell straight away that this was a lawyer though from the way you wrote his speech. You seem to have a way with words Ed, not unsurprisingly. Perhaps you should be a lawyer :P

I get the impression that the beggar is innocent from the way you write it, but the minds have been tainted so that no amount of defence can save him.

Your sporadic installment once more wows me Mister Harmless.

ladies always seem to win harassment cases on tv..
the defence attorney has his work cut out, though you leave little hope.

Ah, this is really good Ed! :) A sequel should most definitely have an appearance…soon perhaps?! ;)

Very dramatic. That opening does sound like a defense attorney rationalization, but it still worked in the end.

Never underestimate the power of the middle class and their inexorable sense of the holier-than-thou. Very nicely styled piece.

I disagree with some of the earlier comments. I think the opening paragraph works really well. I liked that the prosecutor doesn’t open in a typical manner.

Excellent! I love the emotional manipulation at play here. In the practice of law, the reality of events can so easily be swept aside by emotions.

I suppose it is a weakness in the adversarial legal system, where attorneys are paid to argue a set position, rather than from some ethical standing.