Opposing council, your honor, today youve heard a murder case that is all about

time. And by illustrating three separate moments in time the state has met its
burden of proof to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not
acting in self-defense but instead with acted with malice of forethought
What happened before the murder what happened the exact moment of the murder
and what happened after the murder was over
Lets start from the beginning. What was the defendants motive in killing the victim.
Witness testified to large insurance policies being taken out by the defendant.
Insurance policies that she intended to cash in on.
Your honor, no matter how much Mr/Ms. _____ weaved around the evidence, he
wrote a letter on april 22nd that happened on the next day
Your honor, fig newton did not steal the Cherokee rose he was asleep when it was
taken moreover he was the one who recovered it. Fig newton went the defendants
office upon her request, he wasnt going for any revenge all he wanted was the
truth. He had NO REASON to be the aggressor
The defendant on the other hand a myriad of reasons to commit this crime. Which
brings us to the moment of the murder, the defendant claims she was thrown
around the room, but she has nothing to show for that but a cut on her hand
She was calm cool and collected just ten minutes after she was driven to kill. In
alleged self defense
But what do we know about the moment from the defendants own testimony about
that moment, all we know is that she broke free of the clash with fig newton, if there
was one.

We know at that time she was across a large table from him. When she claimed she
was prompted to reach for her gun. She had to take the time to take it out of the
drawer, and for some reason it was loaded with armed and deadly ammunition.
Designed to do nothing other than kill.
Your honor based on the physical evidence we know that first bullet was a graze
wound that wouldnt have immobilized newton, we also know that the first bullet
was shot at newtons back. Is that self-defense?
The evidence shows that one bullet just wasnt enough for the defendant because
she didnt fire once or twice at the same spot, she fired twice in very different
directions with very different angles and very different times. Members of the jury
the bullet even if fired quickly struck a more fatal bullseye. That was the
distinguishable act of malice.
Members of the jury its the time between the two bullets that proves malice murder
under ____ law.

I dont have to tell you the defendant wasnt acting in self-defense. She already has.
The defendant told you she wasnt acting in self-defense when she waited 24
minutes to call the police. The defendant told you that she wasnt acting in self
defense when she had no explanation for the disappearance of the second bullet or
any casing in that entire room. The defendant told you she wasnt acting in self
defense she refused to call the police but agreed to call her friend.
She called ac leaning crew to get rid of every single piece of evidence the same
night she murdered fig newton. What does she have to show for this confrontation,
nothing but single cut on her hand. A mockery of the law of self-defense. The truth
had all the time in the world, members of the jury today the defendants time is up
we are confident we will convict her for malice murder .