if u were to be a lawyer defending a person of a self defensive murder how would u start ur opening statement?

Question

im doing a report on a story called most dangerous game and i have to basically explain why he murdered the person. and i need further explaination on how u would start that satatement or opening statement to the court.
and yes it was a self defensive case
if u are a lawyer and would like to help me out please email me?
and i am begging or a teacher or tutor or if u just feel that u can help me

Answer 1

If you are a defense attorney your job is to convince the jury to rule according to the law, and not your kneejerk reaction. If a man pleads guilty to murder the jury will want to punish him. So, you have to make them realise that under the law self-defense gives him the right to be acquitted of the charges. The jury are supposed to be the ones who analyze the evidence and weigh it in accordance to the law. So you have to keep them steered toward the law, and not to their emotions. That's why jury selection is everything in a murder case. Some people are ruled by their hearts, and others by their minds.

Answer 2

Opening and closing arguments are about telling a story.

The evidence presented during the trial supports the argument, and satisifies the legal requirements. But the story is what convinces the jury, or not. If you can tell a story that makes more sense than your opponent, and the jury believes it more than your opponen't story then as long as your evidence matches the story, you will win.

People remember best short sentences, especially the first and last ones spoken. It's called the doctrine of primacy and recency. So, try to boil down your story to one short (10-word) sentence, that conveys the essence of your case. For example, let's take the story of Goldilocks and the Three Bears, in a case against Goldilocks for breaking and entering.

Prosecutor: "A family's peace is shattered when a thoughtless woman vandalizes their home."

Defense: "A lost and frightened girl seeks shelter in a neighbor's house."

Same facts, told from two perspectives. Now, which story will the jury believe? That's how you frame your opening argument.

Answer 3

That was a great book!!! I read it in 7th grade. I'd start by explaining what a great person he is. Talk about his likes dislikes, family life etc. Then get into detail about his situation on the island, and how that obviously psychotic man made several attempts on his life. End by saying that had he not defended himself, he would not be alive to defend himself in the court of law.

Answer 4

Lead by introducing how normal the day was up to the point where the situation arose that you needed to defend yourself.

Then lay into the guilty party for ruining your day, week, month, year...

This lays the foundation of being a rational person going about your own business and introduces the attacker as being the disruptive element.

Answer 5

it extremely is with the help of the fact each and every individual is authorized a honest trial, to tell their area of the story. some people who're appointed as a murderer are harmless human beings in simple terms falsely accused, and a few harmless human beings have been sent to prisons for crimes they in no way committed. Now if somebody became you in asserting you killed a individual, once you quite did no longer, would not you want a lawyer to guard you from going to reformatory? See, thats why quite everyone seems to be authorized a tribulation. If a lawyer helps somebody who's certainly to blame, some human beings additionally go through psychological ailments or have been self protecting. might or no longer that's honest for a individual who's protecting them self be sent to reformatory for all times? some human beings don't have self belief so. additionally if a individual has an ailment and that they harm somebody they're additionally allowed by skill of trial to share their ailment so despite in the event that they're discovered to blame instead of going to reformatory they bypass to a medical institution to get help so they're in a position to be greater desirable. So that's continuously significant to have a tribulation for people who disobey any regulation. and not utilising a tribulation we would not be waiting to take heed to what handed off and discover out if we are doing the marvelous factor. simply by fact of this quite everyone seems to be authorized to be defended by skill of a celebration. And thats why that's a legal experts job, so they do the marvelous issues for their customer despite if or no longer they're to blame, or no longer to blame by skill of despite reason.

Answer 6

Introduce your client and paint him in the most normal, family friendly way possible. Make it a point to humanize him to the jury or judge and show later that only the most extreme conditions allowed him to react in the way that he did.

Answer 7

Have the Jury close their eyes and imagine themselves in the role... paint the picture of the incidents as they occurred.... then tell them to open their eyes and explain to them that you are going to prove to them,,,beyond doubt,,, that your client is innocent of the charges brought forth by the prosecution...

Answer 8

introduce the evidence with and opening statementment is how I would do it.