The Drawbridge Case

I am a prosecuting attorney presenting the murder case of “The Drawbridge” to the jury. The case begins with the threat given to the baroness by her husband. The baron warns the baroness to remain in the castle while he is gone or else severe punishment will follow. She does not listen and decides to head out and meet her lover. Upon her return to the castle, the drawbridge is blocked by the gatemen. The gateman is ordered by the baron to deny her entrance, and this causes the baroness to seek out other ways to enter the castle. She asks her lover for help, the boatman for a ride to the castle, and her friend for money but no help is given. In desperation to get home, the baroness decides to cross the bridge and is killed by the gateman. Therefore,

Although she is, in fact, the one who put herself in the difficult situation by disobeying her husband, it does not mean she is necessarily the one to blame. Right before her death, the baroness “returned to the bridge in desperation” (1). Using logic, one can reason that the baroness was acting under duress and clearly not thinking straight. She was denied help by her lover who explains their relationship is only a romantic one and her friend who would not give her enough money to get on the boat. The baroness was growing fearful and futile in discovering a way to save herself, and therefore she acts foolishly. Before the baron left to visit his outlying districts, he threatened his wife: “Do not leave the castle while I am gone, or I will punish you severely when I return!” (1). The baron could have been abusing the baroness which eventually caused her to seek out a lover. This lover then abandoned her when she asked for help to get back home. When the baroness returns, the gateman says, “Do not attempt to cross the bridge, Baroness, or I will have to kill you. The baron ordered me to do so” (1). The baron had no morals when threatening his wife. He claimed that he would severely punish her if she left the castle but severely punish is not equivalent to death. The baroness had no idea that her fate would be death if she disobeyed her

With no source of support from friends and others, the baroness acts in desperation: “The baroness [...] attempted to cross the castle, and was slain by the gateman” (1). It is only logical to conclude that the gateman is responsible since he committed the physical act of killing. The one who kills is always the one responsible because they should have enough morals to stop themselves. On the other hand, when the baroness attempts to cross the bridge earlier, the gateman says, “Do not attempt to cross this bridge, Baroness, or I will have to kill you. The baron ordered me to do so” (1). The fate of his job did rest in the fate of the baron. If he had disobeyed the baron he may have been fired. Although this is true, it does not take away from the fact that he could have had another option. As stated earlier in the case, the baron told his wife, “Do not leave the castle while I am gone, or I will punish you severely when I return” (1). Knowing the way the baron acts and how he treats his wife, with injustice, it is safe to say that the gateman must have been afraid of what might happen to him. Either way, the one who does the actual killing does have some choice in the matter and has control over their