If Mr. Hyde's case went to court, I would probably prosecute him. The reason for this is that he committed a crime plain and simple. He murdered someone which needs to be dealt with. I realize that people will argue that it was in fact Jekyll who is to blamed but I don't see it that way. I would ask Utterson and Poole as my witnesses and I think that all of the facts are in my favor.
People may also claim that it is society who is to blame for Hyde's actions. People would also think that perhaps Jekyll had a disease such as a mental illness. I would not agree mostly because it is a very unclear disease, especially in the 1800s.I think that argument would be too unclear for it to be proved true. I don't think the family of Carew would ever forgive the court if Hyde was let go and I don't think that will happen. I believe that he will be punished for his crimes with jail or execution.
Based on this blog, I can see that you are thinking very clearly about who your audience is! This is a good sign. I assume that your strategy is going to be to list the cold, hard facts of the murder of Sir Danvers Carew. This will be a good place to start, but how will you overcome the defense attorney's argument of insanity? What are the morals/values of Victorian Society that you will use to keep your jury thinking that mental illness is not a good enough defense? Allow them to understand the implications of letting a person like Hyde go on a insanity plea? How would that affect/disturb society as they know it? Good luck!
ReplyDelete