Opening&Closing+statments


 * Opening Statement- Kat **

** May it please the Court, counsel, ladies and gentlemen of the jury **// ? //On the night of November 25, 2004 Paula Thrombold murdered her husband Gavan Wright to gain his insurance money. We the prosecution are going to prove that Paula Thrombold killed her husband to receive his insurance money. We will also prove that she had multiple opportunities to escape from her place of residence; Paula received a phone call from Mr. Wright and thus stayed in her home and awaited his return knowing that he was upset with her. We submit that the defendant Paula Thrombold is guilty for the murder of her husband under the pretense of gaining his insurance money. The defendant is guilty of first degree murder because she (Paula) never reported abuse,(we submit) she had multiple opportunities to escape the situation and that she went straight for the gun; without trying anything else. And shot him. We will prove that the defendant Paula Thrombold is responsible for the death of her husband by having the following witnesses on the stand to testify. Kelly Carter will testify that Paula admitted to killing her husband before and after she was read her Miranda rights; she also lead Kelly to the dead body of her husband, the story that Paula told Kelly does not match up with the evidence which we will prove. We will also prove the intoxicated blood level of Mr. Wright his time of death would have made it easy for her to escape. but she chose to hide and wait wit a gun instead. Our second witness will be Taylor Harris; he heard the gunshots as he walked into their garage to go meet Gavin Wright (Paula’s husband). Gavin had told him about Paula reviewing the insurance policies and moving the gun around their home. Our third witness to the stand will be Peyton Green; she was their physician and knew the couple for a long period of time. Miss. Green will prove that there has never been any indication of abuse towards Paula from Gavin. She had been informed by Mr. Wright that his gun had been moved in the home multiple times without his knowledge. He was also aware that Paula had been looking through their life insurance policies lately. Peyton Green (Mrs. Green) also claims that even when she asked Paula straight out that she denied any and all types of abuse. Paula Thrombold is guilty and did not kill her husband out of self defense. She had thought about this beforehand, had reviewed insurance policies, and moved the gun around. She also had a significant time in which she could have left the situation, but she did not. Paula Thrombold had multiple opportunities to leave their home and avoid this whole situation. This was not Self defense but pre-meditated. We will show you that Mrs. Thromblods statement does not match up with the evidence. We will prove that beyond a reasonable dought that Paula Thromblod killed her husband to gain his insurance money, pre meditated murder. Not self defense. // The evidence will prove that on November 25, 2004, the defendant Paula Thromblod armed with a loaded // // gun shot her husband. This evidence will lead to only one conclusion. It will show that Paula killed her husband not in self defense but to gain his insurance money. If // // this convinces you of anything, it is that she should be put behind bars. Thank you… //

**Closing statement- Dylan** **Take your points and create your closing in paragraph form.** A.** the defendant Paula Thrombold had lots of time. time to run. time to call for help.but did she do that? no. she stayed and she waited. and she set up a gun. Self Defense? or pre-meditated murder? Ladies and Gentlemen, this was murder.
 * I.** **Opening Impact Statement
 * B.** Ladies and gentleman of the jury, you must observe the facts. Paula was looking at life insurance policies. She constantly denied any abuse people including her doctor and she never officially reported the self defense to anyone. Paula had plenty of time to leave the house before Gavin got home. Also, once Gavin was home at which time he was already very slow-moving, because he was intoxicated over the legal limit, she had enough time to run upstairs and go straight for the gun, but she could not run down the stairwell to the pool outside? She simply went straight for the gun and shot at him, not once but three times, until he was dead.
 * C.** I urge you to make the right choice, and put a woman who did not kill her husband in a last ditch effort to save her own life, but to get rid of a problem in her life and reap the benefits. It is simply not right for this woman to be let free.

A.** There is one thing that needs to be looked at in this case. Mrs. Thrombold had two legitimate chance to leave. Because she did not take either of these chances before resorting to killing her husband when he never even did anything physical to her at that point.
 * II.** **State the Issue

A.** Story starting from her getting home and calling Gavin.
 * III. What really happened and proof
 * B.** Show Exhibit of upstairs showing how she could have exited.
 * C.** Admissions from opponents witnesses

A.** The defense wants you to believe, ladies and gentleman of the jury, that this was shooting him was her last line of defense. How can this possibly be? When she went upstairs she went straight for that gun. That was her plan. And she had it in her mind that as soon as Gavin got through the door, she was going to shoot him. Which she did, three times, hit him twice, until he died, without him even laying a finger on her.
 * IV. Refute the other side

A.** Paula Thrombold took no other actions to save herself and get out of the situation. Because of this, she is liable for the death of her husband.
 * V. Basis of liability/no liabilty

A.** She did not take the two chances to leave, she was responsible for saving herself and she waited until Gavin came through the door to do that. By shooting him.
 * VI.** **Burden of proof

A.** Ladies and gentleman of the jury, the act we have been reviewing in this trial today was murder. Paula Thrombold had no need to kill him. She should have went to the police as soon as Gavin threatened her on the phone. But she did not. She waited for him to come home, she even changed her clothes, when she has stated that he does not like her to do that. Why would she make him more mad after he already threatened her? Once Gavin was home, she headed straight for the gun. Justice needs to be served. This woman cannot be let walk when she blaintantly killed her husband. With plenty of time and chances to leave, is that really self-defense or premeditated murder.
 * VII. Closing Impact Statement