Transcript of The Sandwich Lady v. The People

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Headless arrow detail.png
This section or article is incomplete and could do with improvement.
Reason: Jury reaction missing on the defence part, two part of Simon Sez on-trial talking missing, player summary missing with no enough correct choice on defence side, prosecutor's summary at prosecutor's case
You can discuss this issue on the talk page or edit this page to improve it.
This transcript involves dialogue with Clerk, Judge, Prosecutor, Defender, The Jury, Sandwich lady, and the player.

Court documents[edit | edit source]

Court summons[edit | edit source]

The following text is transcluded from Transcript:Court_summons_(The_Sandwich_Lady_v._The_People).

Court summons

You have been summoned to the Seers' Village courthouse to work on the case of The Sandwich Lady vs The People. Please present yourself to the court clerk at your earliest convenience.

Case report 1[edit | edit source]

The following text is transcluded from Transcript:Case_report_1_(The_Sandwich_Lady_v._The_People).

Fingerprint Report

Match the culprit's fingerprints to those of the suspect.

Culprit

Market Guard
Victim

Circumstances and evidence[edit | edit source]

The following text is transcluded from Transcript:Case_report_2_(The_Sandwich_Lady_v._The_People).

Circumstances and Evidence
Suspect: Sandwich Lady
Case Background: The Sandwich Lady was arrested by local authorities in Ardougne after a man came forward saying that he had been beaten with a baguette.
The victim, Simon Sez, assisted the local authorities in locating and identifying his attacker.

Mr. Sez says that the Sandwich Lady was offering him a free sandwich and then proceeded to beat him with a baguette.

The Sandwich Lady maintains that Mr. Sez was trying to steal from her, and that she was only defending herself.
On arrest, the following items were found on the Defendant's person:
1 baguette
1 coin purse
1 fingerprint extracted from the baguette

On the victim's person the following item was found:
1 cake

There is no need to interview witnesses in preparation for this case.

Character background[edit | edit source]

The following text is transcluded from Transcript:Case_report_3_(The_Sandwich_Lady_v._The_People).

Character background
Suspect: The Sandwich Lady
Background: The Sandwich Lady is a popular business woman, who travels the world offering her wares to hungry adventurers. Background interviews were conducted with some of her customers, and all of which were consistent with her being a generous woman.

Victim: Simon Sez
Background: Sez is a citizen of Ardougne. His main focus is on woodcutting, but he enjoys spending time in Ardougne market, looking at sellers' wares (although he sadly can't afford any).

There is no need to interview witnesses in preparation for this case.

Pre-trial[edit | edit source]

Starting the case[edit | edit source]

Talking to the Clerk about the Court summons[edit | edit source]

Searching the File cabinet[edit | edit source]

Talking to the Sandwich Lady[edit | edit source]

  • Sandwich Lady: I didn't do it!
  • (Dialogue terminates)

Enter the court room[edit | edit source]

Trial[edit | edit source]

Commencement[edit | edit source]

Opening statement[edit | edit source]

Only if prosecuting

Only if defending

Talking to the judge[edit | edit source]

  • Judge: What can I do for you?
    • Your Honour, could you explain what I need to do?
    • Your Honour, I'd like to present evidence.
    • Your Honour, I'd like to call a witness.
      • Player: Your Honour, I would like to call a witness.
        • Choose your witness:
          • Sandwich Lady.
          • Simon Sez (victim).
          • No one at this time. I would like to present physical evidence.
          • No one at this time. I would like to finish and summarise my case.
            • Player: No one at this time, Your Honour. I would like to finish my presentation by summarising my case to the Jury.
            • (Proceed to 'Summary' below)
    • Your Honour, I'd like to summarise my case.
      • Player: Your Honour, I would like to finish by summarising my case to the Jury.
      • (Proceed to 'Summary' below)

Presenting evidence[edit | edit source]

Fingerprint[edit | edit source]

If prosecuting:

  • Player: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, if I could draw your attention to Prosecution Evidence #1: A fingerprint found on the baguette.
  • The Prosecution presents the fingerprints as evidence.
  • Player: You can clearly see that this fingerprint is none other than the Sandwich Lady's. That may not seem remarkable, but you have to consider the fingerprints that are NOT on the baguette. Where are the victim's fingerprints, if he was supposedly stealing the baguette?
  • The Jury reacts to the argument.
  • The jury agrees with your argument.
  • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)

If defending:

  • Player: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, if I could draw your attention to Prosecution Evidence #1: A fingerprint found on the baguette.
  • Player: Any self-respecting thief - and, as a lawyer, I've come across a few - uses gloves of silence, leaving no fingerprint evidence behind. The 'victim' is no different.
  • The Jury reacts to the argument.
  • The jury agrees with your argument.
  • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)

Baguette[edit | edit source]

If prosecuting:

  • Player: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, if I could draw your attention to Prosecution Evidence #2: A baguette.
  • The Prosecution presents the baguette as evidence.
    • It has been identified as the weapon.
      • Player: The victim identified the baguette as the object used to strike him repeatedly. It's hard to imagine anyone making up that kind of story.
      • If the Jury didn't disagree with the player's argument about the baguette before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury agrees with your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)
    • It's a tasty sandwich.
      • Player: It's a tasty sandwich. I tried a bit of it, but I'm more of a jubbly and mayonnaise person myself.
      • If the Jury didn't agree with the player's argument about the baguette before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury disagrees with your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)
    • This baguette was found on the accused.
      • Player: This baguette was found on the accused. Alongside the coin purse and other pastries and breads, we can deduce that she is in fact a sandwich lady! Ha! There's no getting past me.
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • The jury doesn't know what to think about your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)

If defending:

  • Player: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, if I could draw your attention to Prosecution Evidence #2: A baguette.
  • The Prosecution presents the baguette as evidence.
    • It's just a piece of bread, not a weapon.
      • Player: The Sandwich Lady states clearly that this is just a piece of bread, not a weapon. As it is barely marked, broken or crumbling, I find it hard to believe that it has been used to hit anyone. Look - the filling's even still in there.
      • If the Jury didn't disagree with the player's argument about the baguette before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury agrees with your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)
    • It's a tasty baguette.
      • Player: It's a tasty baguette, I will not lie to you, I tried a bit of it. The cream cheese is dreamy.
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • (jury reaction transcript missing. edit)
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)
    • This baguette was found on the defendant.
      • Player: This baguette was found on the accused: a sandwich lady. Are we meant to be surprised about this? Am I missing something?
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • The jury doesn't know what to think about your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)

Coin purse[edit | edit source]

If prosecuting:

  • Player: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, if I could draw your attention to Prosecution Evidence #3: A coin purse.
  • The Prosecution presents the coin purse as evidence.
    • The coin purse is full of money.
      • Player: This coin purse is full of money. Now, if the victim attempted to steal from the Sandwich Lady, as she said on record, why would he leave a full coin purse behind?
      • If the Jury didn't disagree with the player's argument about the coin purse before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury agrees with your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)
    • The coin purse is quite heavy. It'd make a good weapon.
      • Player: The coin purse is quite heavy - far heavier than a baguette. Seems odd that she would attack someone with the sandwich.
      • If the Jury didn't agree with the player's argument about the coin purse before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury disagrees with your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)
    • The money inside is a mixture of coins from all over the world.
      • Player: The coin purse is full of coins from all over the world. Look, here's a coin from ScapeRune! It says 'You owe Evil Bob 5gp' around the edge.
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • The jury doesn't know what to think about your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)

If defending:

  • Player: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, if I could draw your attention to Prosecution Evidence #3: A coin purse.
  • The Prosecution presents the coin purse as evidence.
    • The coin purse is full of money.
      • Player: The coin purse is full of money, which would imply that the Sandwich Lady is a shrewd businesswoman. I we can agree that this is true, then where is the profit in hitting customers with sticks of bread? It's hardly building a loyal customer-base.
      • If the Jury didn't disagree with the player's argument about the coin purse before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury agrees with your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)
    • The coin purse is quite heavy. It'd make a good weapon.
      • Player: The coin purse is quite heavy. It would have made a much better weapon than the baguette. Seems odd that she would attack someone with a sandwich. Not that she did attack anyone, of course.
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • (jury reaction transcript missing. edit)
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)
    • The money inside is a mixture of coins from all over the world.
      • Player: Can you believe some of the coins in there? There's some TokKul, some Dungeoneering tokens and an amulet of catspeak. It seems her baguettes are internationally renowned.
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • The jury doesn't know what to think about your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)

Cake[edit | edit source]

If prosecuting:

  • Player: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, if I could draw your attention to Prosecution Evidence #4: A cake.
  • The Prosecution presents the cake as evidence.
    • The cake was found on the victim.
      • Player: The cake was found on the victim, and was likely going to be his dessert. Baguette and cake: the Meal of Kings.
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • The jury doesn't know what to think about your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)
    • The cake is sold in the Ardougne market.
      • Player: The cake is sold in Ardougne market at the baker's stall. It's also regularly stolen from that stall, now I come to think of it, but that's beside the point.
      • If the Jury didn't agree with the player's argument about the cake before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury disagrees with your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)
    • The cake is very tasty!
      • Player: Mm-hmm! That's one tasty cake! You all don't mind if I tuck into this, do you?
      • If the Jury didn't agree with the player's argument about the cake before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury disagrees with your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)

If defending:

  • Player: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, if I could draw your attention to Prosecution Evidence #4: A cake.
  • The Prosecution presents the cake as evidence.
    • The cake was found on the victim.
      • Player: The cake was found on the victim. If we are to believe that he was on the breadline, and only browsing, then how could he afford this expensive cake? Kike so many people in Ardougne market, the victim was clearly thieving and attempted to steal from the Sandwich Lady.
      • If the Jury didn't disagree with the player's argument about the cake before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury agrees with your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)
    • The cake is sold in the Ardougne market.
      • Player: The cake is sold in Ardougne marked at the baker's stall. It's also regularly stolen from that stall, so I've heard.
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • The jury doesn't know what to think about your argument.
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)
    • The cake is very tasty!
      • Player: Is it professional to eat the evidence you are presenting? Bah, but it's so tasty. Maybe I'll give it a lick.
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • (jury reaction transcript missing. edit)
      • (Proceed to 'What evidence do you want to present?' above)

Cross-examination[edit | edit source]

Sandwich lady[edit | edit source]

If prosecuting:

  • Ask about:
    • The incident.
      • Player: Could you please describe the incident to us?
      • Sandwich Lady: Of course, dearie. I was in Ardougne market, making deliveries to the baker's stall and selling a few of my own wares. As I was selling a doughnut to one of the market guards, this little oik tried to steal a baguette from me, so I clipped him across the ear with it.
      • Player: So, you did strike Simon Sez with a baguette?
      • Sandwich Lady: Yes, but it was provoked!
      • If the Jury didn't agree with the player's argument about the Sandwich Lady before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury disagrees with your argument.
      • (Shows previous options)
    • The coin purse.
      • Player: In your statement, you said that Simon Sez was stealing a sandwich from you, which provoked your attack. At the time of your arrest, a hefty coin purse was found on your person. If Mr Sez was trying to steal from you, why didn't he take the coin purse?
      • Sandwich Lady: He got the sandwichlust! I could see the tell-tale baguette shapes in his eyes.
      • Player: It's far more likely that he wasn't really stealing!
      • If the Jury didn't disagree with the player's argument about the Sandwich Lady before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury agrees with your argument.
      • (Shows previous options)
    • The baguette.
      • Player: Why did you use a baguette to attack the victim?
      • Sandwich Lady: Oh, dearie, I was provoked and panicked. I wrested it from the lad and clipped him round the ear to teach him a lesson.
      • Player: So, it was an attack of opportunity. You didn't agree with the sandwich he was trying to buy, so you hit him with it.
      • Sandwich Lady: He wasn't trying to buy it, he was stealing!
      • Player: That, madam, is what this trial will determine.
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • The jury doesn't know what to think about your argument.
      • (Shows previous options)
    • That's all, for now.
      • Player: That's all, for now. Thank you.
      • (Dialogue ends)

If defending:

  • Ask about:
    • The incident.
      • Player: Could you please describe the incident to us?
      • Sandwich Lady: Of course, dearie. I was in Ardougne market, making deliveries to the baker's stall and selling a few of my own wares. As I was selling a doughnut to one of the market guards, this little oik tried to steal a baguette from me, so I clipped him across the ear with it.
      • Player: It sounds like you were just protecting your livelihood.
      • Sandwich Lady: That's right, dearie. You are very good at this, aren't you?
      • If the Jury didn't disagree with the player's argument about the Sandwich Lady before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury agrees with your argument.
      • (Shows previous options)
    • The coin purse.
      • Player: At the time of your arrest, a hefty coin purse was found on your person. You must be doing very good business to have that much money on you.
      • Sandwich Lady: When the apocalypse comes, dearie, and the world is a scarred wasteland, there will still be a need for cake and croissants.
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • The jury doesn't know what to think about your argument.
      • (Shows previous options)
    • The baguette.
      • Player: Why do you think the alleged victim identified the baguette as the weapon used to attack him?
      • Sandwich Lady: Because I hit him with it, dearie.
      • Player: Err, you hit him with it?
      • Sandwich Lady: Oh, yes, and I'd do it again if I had half a chance. He's a nasty little thief and he thoroughly deserved it.
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • (jury reaction transcript missing. edit)
      • (Shows previous options)
    • That's all, for now.
      • Player: That's all, for now. Thank you.
      • (Dialogue ends)

Simon Sez[edit | edit source]

If prosecuting:

  • Ask about:
    • The incident.
      • Player: Could you please describe the incident for us?
      • Simon Sez: Me and a few friends were having a laugh in Ardougne market, when the Sandwich Lady came out of nowhere. She offered me a sandwich, but, when I tried to take the baguette, she attacked me with it!
      • Player: Why do you think she attacked you?
      • Simon Sez: Pfft, who knows? She screamed 'Not that one', so maybe I didn't pick the food that she wanted. The rest is a blur of baguette and filling.
      • If the Jury didn't disagree with the player's argument about Simon Sez before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury agrees with your argument.
      • (Shows previous options)
    • The cake.
      • Player: What were you doing in Ardougne market?
      • Simon Sez: Oh, me and my friends like to hang about and browse what's on sale, you know? We don't have much in the way of cash, so it's more window shopping.
      • Player: The cake that you had in your possession: it was bought with your last few coins, then?
      • Simon Sez: Uh...the baker gave it to me for free. He said I looked like I was wasting away.
      • If the Jury didn't agree with the player's argument about Simon Sez before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury disagrees with your argument.
      • (Shows previous options)
    • The Sandwich Lady.
      • Player: Were you acquainted with the Sandwich Lady before the incident?
      • Simon Sez: No. I'd heard of her but never seen her. Nothing was said about her swiping people with baguettes though; I would have remembered that.
      • The Jury reacts to the argument.
      • The jury doesn't know what to think about your argument.
      • (Shows previous options)
    • That's all, for now.
      • Player: That's all, for now. Thank you.
      • (Dialogue ends)

Defending

  • Ask about:
    • The incident.
      • Player: Could you please describe the incident for us?
      • Simon Sez: Me and the lads were handing about Ardougne market, chatting and browsing the stuff on sale. Then, out of nowhere, the Sandwich Lady appeared. The rest you know: she offered me a sandwich but I wanted a baguette, and she ended up hitting me round the face.
      • Player: Player: Why do you think she attacked you after offering a free sandwich?
      • Simon Sez: I'd hazard a guess that she wanted me to buy the sandwich, not the baguette. Crazy woman.
      • If the Jury didn't disagree with the player's argument about Simon Sez before:
        • The Jury reacts to the argument.
        • The jury agrees with your argument.
      • (Shows previous options)
    • The cake.
      • (Transcript missing. edit)
      • (Shows previous options)
    • The Sandwich Lady.
      • (Transcript missing. edit)
      • (Shows previous options)
    • That's all, for now.
      • Player: That's all, for now. Thank you.
      • (Dialogue ends)

Talking to the prosecutor[edit | edit source]

Only if defending:

Talking to the defender[edit | edit source]

Only if prosecuting:

All evidence presented[edit | edit source]

If the player has received one positive or negative jury response for each piece of evidence:

All evidence presented and witnesses interviewed[edit | edit source]

If the player has received one positive or negative jury response for each piece of evidence and each witness:

  • Judge: I think that is enough. It's time for you to summarise your case to the Jury.
  • (Proceed to 'Summary' below)

Summary[edit | edit source]

  • Which member of the Jury would you like to try to appeal to?
  • Opens Jury selection interface.
  • If prosecuting:
    • If the player made enough correct choices in their case:
      • Player: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, random attacks like this make Gielinor a fearful place to live. But we can make a change, and that change can start here in this courtroom. We shouldn't have to worry about being attacked when buying our daily bread. For this alone, I ask you to convict.
    • If the player did not make enough correct choices in their case:
      • Player: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I can't tell the difference between a ciabatta and a panini. Does that mean that I should get hit in the face with a baguette? We shouldn't have to worry about being attacked when buying our daily bread. For this alone, I ask you to convict.
    • Judge: Very well. Now, the Defence may present their case.
    • (Same as 'The defence's case: Full case' below)
  • If defending:
    • If the player made enough correct choices in their case:
      • Player: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I have presented evidence that conclusively proves the Defendant is innocent with regard to these crimes. We cannot let Ardougne market become a free-for-all where anything on display is a target for thieves. We must protect small businesses like the Sandwich Lady's.
    • If the player did not make enough correct choices in their case:
      • (Transcript missing. edit)
    • Judge: I believe we've heard enough.
  • (Same as Transcript:Court Cases § Pronouncing verdict)

The prosecution's case[edit | edit source]

Only if defending:

Summary[edit | edit source]

  • Prosecutor: My case rests on these points: The baguette had only the Sandwich Lady's fingerprints on it. The victim identified the baguette as the weapon, and the full coin purse in the Sandwich Lady's posession wasn't stolen. If the victim was stealing, wouldn't he take that over a sandwich? I called Simon Sez to the stand and he said the Sandwich Lady offered him a sandwich for free but then attacked hem when he tried to take it. I then called the Sandwich Lady. She did not have a convincing answer as to why Simon Sez would steal a sandwich and not her coin purse.

Full case[edit | edit source]

  • Prosecutor: Members of the Jury, I am going to present you with evidence that decisively proves the Sandwich Lady attacked an innocent customer. First, the fingerprint. If the sandwich lady's story is to be believed, the victim's fingerprint should be on the baguette as he tried to steal it. It is not. But, if the victim's story is to be believed, the Sandwich Lady struck him with it, so only her fingerprint should be on it. Lo and behold, her fingerprint is on the baguette. Second, the baguette. The Sandwich Lady may claim it's just a piece of bread, not a weapon, but the victim identified it as the object used to strike him repeatedly.
  • The prosecution presents the baguette as evidence.
  • Prosecutor: Last, but certainly not least, I present the coin purse found on the suspect's person at the time of the arrest. The coin purse is full of money. Now, if the victim were stealing from the Defendant, as noted in the Sandwich Lady's statement, why would he leave a full coin purse but try to take a baguette?
  • The prosecution presents the coin purse as evidence.
  • Prosecutor: The prosecution calls Simon Sez.
  • Simon Sez is called to the stand.
  • Prosecutor: Could you please describe the incident for us?
  • Simon Sez: I was enjoying myself in Ardougne market when the Sandwich Lady appeared out of nowhere. She offered me a free sandwich, but, when I tried to take the baguette, she attacked me with it!
  • Prosecutor: Why do you think she attacked you after having offered a free sandwich?
  • Simon Sez: She screeched 'Not that one!' and proceeded to hit me with it. I can only guess that I didn't pick the correct loaf according to her mad logic.
  • The Jury reacts to the argument and agrees with the prosecutor.
  • Prosecutor: The prosecution calls the Sandwich Lady.
  • Simon Sez leaves the stand. The Sandwich Lady is called to the stand.
  • Prosecutor: Your statement to the court was that Simon Sez was stealing a sandwich from you, which provoked you to attack. At the time of your arrest, a hefty coin purse was found on your person. If Mr. Sez was trying to steal from you, why didn't he take the coin purse?
  • Sandwich Lady: He must have had a craving for one of my tasty 'wiches and money just didn't interest him any more. It happens more than you'd know, dearie.
  • Prosecutor: It's more likely that he wasn't stealing at all!
  • The Jury reacts to the argument and agrees with the prosecutor.
  • (Prosecutor's summary transcript missing. edit)

The defence's case[edit | edit source]

Only if prosecuting:

Summary[edit | edit source]

  • Defender: My case rests on these points: It's unsurprising only the Sandwich Lady's fingerprint is on the sandwich. A thief would wear gloves. The baguette is still in one piece, unlikely if it was used as a weapon. Finally, the coin purse is full of money, so she does good business and her customers like her. I called Simon Sez to the stand and asked him what he was doing in the market. It was implicated he possibly stole a cake from the cake vendor. I then called the Sandwich Lady. She stated she was just defending herself when she noticed Simon stealing sandwiches. Something any business person would do.

Full case[edit | edit source]

  • Defender: Members of the Jury, I am going to present you with evidence that decisively proves the Sandwich Lady is innocent. If I could draw your attention to Prosecution Evidence #1: the fingerprint. It's true, the Sandwich Lady's fingerprint is on the baguette. Is this really surprising? If the victim was stealing it, which I plan to prove today, then his fingerprints wouldn't appear on it if he wore gloves of silence. If I could now draw your attention to Prosecution Evidence #2: the baguette. The Sandwich Lady states clearly that this is just a piece of bread, not a weapon. Since the baguette is still in one piece, it's hard to believe it was used to hit the victim hard. Baguettes break quite easily under normal circumstances, let alone hitting some one with it. If I could draw your attention to Prosecution Evidence #3: the coin purse. The coin purse is full of money, so she clearly does very good business. Any good business woman would know that attacking customers would be counter- productive to profits. The Defence calls Simon Sez.
  • Simon Sez is called to the stand.
  • Defender: What were you doing in Ardougne market?
  • Simon Sez: I enjoy browsing. I can't afford any of it, but I like the atmosphere.
  • Defender: How unfortunate that you can't afford anything there. I understand the baker's stall has exceptional cake.
  • Simon Sez: Oh yes, I love the cake there!
  • Defender: Is that why a cake was in your possession at the time of arrest - even though you couldn't afford to buy one? Mr. Sez, did you steal that cake?
  • Simon Sez: Uh, no, that's not what I meant. That cake isn't mine. I'm being framed! The cake is a lie!
  • The Jury reacts to the argument and agrees with the defender.
  • Defender: The Defence calls the Sandwich Lady.
  • Simon Sez leaves the stand. The Sandwich Lady is called to the stand.
  • Defender: Could you please describe the incident to us?
  • Sandwich Lady: Of course, dearie. I was in Ardougne market, selling my sandwiches to hungry adventurers. While I was taking payment from a loyal customer, I noticed someone trying to steal a sandwich. I cried out 'Thief!' to get the attention of a nearby market guard and gave the thief a swipe with my baguette.
  • Defender: Then you were just defending your livelihood from a market low-life.
  • Sandwich Lady: That's right, dearie.
  • The Jury reacts to the argument and agrees with the defender.
  • Judge: I think that's enough. It's time for you to summarise your case to the Jury.
  • Defender: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I have presented evidence that conclusively proves the Defendant is innocent with regard to these crimes. This woman provides some of the freshest, tastiest bread and pastry products in the land. To be stolen from by a petty thief is one thing, but to be brought to court for a half-hearted swipe with a soft baguette is beyond ludicrous.
  • (Same as Transcript:Court Cases § Pronouncing verdict)

See also[edit | edit source]