In this trial, Odysseus was on trial for premeditated murder of several suitors. The prosecution argued that Odysseus was fully aware of his actions when committing the murder, and made a plan when he was disguised as a beggar. On the other hand, the defense argued that Odysseus was mentally unstable and manipulated by the gods when committing the murder, and he had no time to plan the murder because he was a sex slave for several years. Although both sides presented interesting arguments, I voted for prosecution because they had stronger arguments, well thought out rebuttals, and better evidence than the defense.
Throughout the trial, I kept track of the general pros and cons of each side. I found the prosecution’s evidence to be more compelling in comparison to the evidence the defense presented. This is because the evidence the defense presented had more holes, and did not flow as well as the prosecution’s. However, the defense had better witnesses to support their argument than the prosecution. The use of the prosecution’s witnesses could have been better, and in the defense’s closing statement, they stated that the prosecution witnesses could be bias
…show more content…
The defense made a good point by saying that Odysseus was mentally unstable after watching his crew suffer death and seeing his ship being destroyed by Zeus. However, this point was disproven by the prosecution because they stated that Odysseus would have shown symptoms of mental instability if he was really mentally ill, and he would not have been able to shoot an arrow through 12 axes. This was a very good rebuttal made by the prosecution, but the turning point in the trial that convinced me Odysseus was guilty was when the prosecution stated that Odysseus had asked for his bow to shoot through axes, showing that he had a deliberate plan in mind and was