Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
During the specific day that the trial took place, Montresor, the defendant, entered the courtroom for the verdict to be read. The entire courtroom was packed, and whispers were heard from the people. The murmurs were because the individuals heard about the inhuman act that Montresor had done to Fortunato, but eventually, everybody settled, including the perpetrator. The prosecutor started by stating that the evidence found incriminated Montresor for the murder of Fortunato. The prosecuting attorney continued by indicating that they had found the victim’s bones left beneath a house that belonged to the culprit (Poe, 2017). The DNA test conducted on the bones proved that they belonged to Fortunato, causing the jury to mumble in low tones.
The district attorney went ahead by indicating that it was impossible to prove that Fortunato went to the place where he was killed by force or willingly. It was possible to verify that the murderer covered the killing. The prosecutor supported his claim by indicating that the victims’ bones were found behind what seemed like a wall made from bricks (Poe, 2017). The judge took a look at the photos presented before him and shook his head. The Fortunato’s attorney went ahead to specify that remains were found in a catacomb room underneath together with other human bones. The other bones found together with the deceased bones suggested that the perpetrator may have been involved in killing other individuals. The respondent looked down blatantly as the attorney presented further evidence to the judge.
The defense attorney’s time to speak came, and he stated that Montresor highly regretted his actions and was remorseful. The public defender noted that Montresor was a sick person and never understood what he was doing since he was insane. The attorney specified that an individual with an insane mind does not comprehend or is not familiar with their actions (Poe, 2017). He continued to plead with the court to allow the defendant to be taken to a mental hospital. The defense attorney detailed that Montresor needed to be treated to avoid similar situations or cases from reoccurring. He supported his plea by demonstrating that insane individuals capable of killing should be kept away from society and subjected to medical care from professionals.
Montresor’s insane condition resulted in him having an obsession with the victim. The situation intensified when the attention that the suspect was seeking could not be reciprocated by the deceased. The attorney persuaded the judge to recommend the jury to allow the defendant to be put under psychiatrist care to improve the suspect’s condition. The public attorney argued that Montresor was suffering from depression for a prolonged period due to his obsession with Fortunato (Poe, 2017). The defense attorney’s arguments started to attract attention from the jury. The public attorney told the jury that if the defendant was convicted for life due to his insanity, it might have led to more stress, leading to attempts to end his life. He argued that individuals who suffer from depression tend to have suicidal thoughts. The attorney urged the jury members to be considerate and allow Montresor to seek medical help.
As the public defender tried to convince the jury, the judge was busy taking notes. The jury found itself in a dilemma of differentiating between unstable psychological conditions whereby Montresor’s mental disorder changes with time. Conversely, the pathological condition in which the defendant finds himself makes him torture his victims. The jury concluded that the defendant was in a stable state of mind since he could remember everything that happened fifty years ago. Montresor went angry after Fortunato told him that he was a freemason and decided to torment him, causing Fortunato’s death. The jury argued that the accused was not insane because he was a mason and ruled Montresor jailed for life.
Reference
Poe, E. (2017). The Cask of Amontillado. In R. Levine, The Norton Anthology of American Literature: Beginnings to 1865 (9th ed., pp. 785 – 790). Norton, W. W. & Company.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.