September 25, 2001
Looking at the actions of the Miller, they can easily be mistaken for cruel, harsh punishment that is justified; however it is my responsibility to relay the reasons he has given in response to the interactions between his wife and the Plowboy. For many months, my client has been subjected to humiliation, and has been accused of being jealous by his fellow townsmen simply because his wife has made a decision to move her love interests from the Miller, to a young man, who happens to work for the Miller. “The Miller knew that the villagers gossiped about his wife and the boy” (225).
Not Guilty
My client does not reject the charges against him. He has admitted to
blinding the Plowboy, however this case is about more than the physical damage
the Plowboy has undergone. Ladies and gentlemen, the emotional damages that
both the Miller’s wife and the Plowboy have put my client through are
irreversible. My client had excellent reasons for his actions, and therefore is
not guilty of the felony assault charges that have been brought against him.
Unarmed
My client acted in a rage of self-defense. Even though the Plowboy was not
armed, he did in fact endanger my client, the Miller. Causing emotional
damage is just as strong as a defense as blinding a boy. In fact, the Plowboy
should be facing similar charges as the Miller for his immoral actions. In one
instance, for example, “She (the Miller’s wife) bowed her head low over the
bowl, and the plowboy would dart a glance faster than lightning at her bulging
bodice” (226). Ladies and gentlemen, not only should the Plowboy be charged
with this emotional damage, but the wife, as well, has committed a crime of
immorality. In fact, it is she who is the main responsibility for this
entire situation! If the Miller’s wife had not tempted the Plowboy by making
such sexual gestures towards him, the Plowboy would still have his sight, and
this case would not be taking place. “It was said that she changed when she
gazed into the boy’s blue eyes” (225). What kind of moral wife acts this way
against her husband, when she is clearly aware that her husband knows of what is
going on? The Miller’s actions were simply out of a rage of hurt feelings and
emotional distress. This distress was brought on by nothing more than his
wife’s decision to make her new love interest someone other than her husband.
The Plowboy, was the person who gave into this temptation.
Torture
Quite often, court rooms hear stories of murder, stories of torture, stories of
hatred, but it is not as often that we hear stories of immorality, and that my
friends, is what this case is about. The wickedness of this case lies in the
hands of the Plowboy’s decision to give in to the wife’s temptation, not
the Miller’s violent response. The Plowboy will be forever scarred, for he can
see no longer. However, in addition to the physical damages the Plowboy will
now face, let us also think of the damages in which my client, the Miller, will
also face in areas such as his business, home-life, and his relationship with
his wife. We are not here today to fix the Plowboy’s eyes. Nor are we here to
point a finger at whoever is responsible, be it the Miller’s wife or the
Plowboy, for the interactions between those two individuals. We are here today
simply to decide that my client’s reasons for blinding the Plowboy are
justified. Immorality versus physical pain: that is what is being
discussed here.
Conclusion
The Plowboy is an immoral individual and his blindness now is enough punishment
for him. He will never be able to look at the Miller’s wife again, nor be
tempted by her actions. Felony assault charges cannot be compared to immoral
acts between a young boy and the wife of a Miller. They should be the
one’s being charged on accounts of immorality, however it is unfortunate that
this court of law does not allow such cases to be made. My client’s actions
were justified, and that is what we are here to prove. We will do the best we
can for each and every juror to see the situation through the eyes of the
Miller. It is his eyes that are the moral ones.
Copyright 2001