I read this to the Jury except for the bold titles and I dropped the reference to the Titanic due to sustained objection and merely read my paragraphs preceded by a number i.e., First, secondly etc..

Closing Argument:

Introduction:

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you have heard all the evidence that is going to be permitted the prosecution and defense of the Defendant to determine guilt or innocence. Now please close your eyes for just a moment and pretend that I am a lawyer and that I am not reading off of a piece of paper but looking you in the eye as a speak. I promise I will look at you after I read this.

Titanic:

But I am not the only pretender in here today. The State pretends to have an iron clad unsinkable conviction that they thought they could sail just close enough to the truth to safely prove just the tip of the iceberg. But with just the limited evidence that the Defendant was permitted to enter, he has been able to tear a fatal gash in the hull. The Defendant was only permitted to show you what was lurking at just 5 feet deep. But had the Defendant been permitted to show what was at 10 and 20 feet deep, the state would be jumping in the life boats and you would have no hesitation or question on any issue to find the Defendant not-guilty.

The first gash is that it is outrageous that Nobody knows nothing:

Did the testimony of the GBRA employees sound a like a rerun of some FBI or CIA internal investigation? Did any body know anything at all related to the Defendant? If it weren’t for the Defendant telling them, they wouldn’t know who broke the window and they would have given up looking for them long ago. The evidence shows that nobody saw the defendant throw a drill bit through a window at GBRA. There are no eye witnesses to the crime they have so medically severed from the huge cancer they have no intention of sending into remission much less curing.

The Second fatal gash is lack of Revenge:

You have to ask yourselves, Did the State prove the defendant acted out of revenge, or did they prove that GBRA employees acted out of revenge? For I believe that the evidence on record shows that at all times relevant to this window breaking episode, GBRA and its employees had at its disposal and within their discretion a method built into their contracts to satisfy the claims of the Defendant. But rather than pay the defendant for his claims for property damage upon two notices with the more than sufficient retainage, they finally released the whole amount to the contractor leaving the Defendant with nothing. And they did this even after a third notice of breaking glass of unhappy unresolved claims. It is outrageous to assume everything is OK and resolved at any point before and after the window event.

The third fatal gash lies in the proof of every element of the Defendant’s Defense:

Was the drill bit thrown through a window at GBRA the result of severe emotional distress caused by the extreme and intentional voluntary conduct of GBRA employees? If so, the defendant is not guilty. Some bureaucrats have perfected the art of making extreme behavior look like ordinary everyday stuff. They must always remain calm and speak softly no matter what is coming from their mouth. I believe we have witnessed two wolves in sheep’s clothing for two days.

The fourth fatal gash is that Defendant fails the Test of Criminal Responsibility:

Did you hear any testimony that would suggest that the Defendant would have broken a window at GBRA without the acts of GBRA or its employees? Is this more like being sued for letting the air out of the tires of the getaway car before the thief could get out of your house with your TV?

The Fifth fatal gash is GBRA’s unmercifulness has touched you:

You are not here today because the Defendant wanted play lawyer. You are here because GBRA refused to seek peace with the defendant. But you may go home in just a few moments upon your unanimous verdict of not guilty. But if your verdict is guilty you will have to sit through some more strange testimony to determine the punishment for the Defendant. But if you want to be merciful in punishment you may serve the same purpose with a not guilty verdict. I don’t believe the evidence in the record will support a finding of full punishment. A hung jury will only condemn six other people to endure this same thing over again. But at least I think you can see that the Defendant has already suffered damage from the acts of GBRA and their contractors and further punishment is not warranted. No matter what your verdict is, your verdict will not solve the injuries caused by GBRA nor will GBRA be prosecuted for their wrongdoings. No matter what GBRA will not answer for their crimes. I believe the evidence on the record shows this case should have never been filed or prosecuted and it is GBRA that is finally embarrassed by the facts.

The Sixth and Final fatal gash in the Titanic is you are now asked to find as a matter of law something that hurts your mind:

So did the State prove the Defendant committed a crime? When defense of private property becomes a crime, Government plunder of private property has become lawful. But sometimes people like the defendant just have to take a chance to resist evil in high places. I also believe that God can persuade 6 jurors to take a chance to do the right thing in the face of injustice. The kingdom and the property does not belong to GBRA or the State of Texas or this courthouse but to God and every person born into the world. Just remember this, no law anywhere can make you call a charging Elephant a sleeping mouse?

You can open your eyes now as I ask you face to face to show me the mercy that GBRA could never show at this stage of the trial so that I return to my life and my damaged property that I live with and have forgiven. Thank you, now lets all go home.