Hi, your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury. My name is (Student’s Name), and the colleague’s name is (insert). We have a contentious charge before you. The case is about John Smith’s employee. The accused person is facing a charge of dealing with the prohibited drug cocaine. He carried three bottles of liquor that later turned out to be components of cocaine. It is your duty today to listen to the facts of the case and reach a verdict as to the guilt of John Smith’s employee.
It is the position of the Crown that Smith’s employee, on 1st July 2018, he went to a lone place within the airport and was in possession of three bags of bottles of cocaine liquor. Therefore, the defendant committed the offense of smuggling illegal drugs into the country because she acknowledged having bought them in Colombia.
We have one main witness, Mr. Sameer Patel, and three co-staffs. Mr. Patel is a customs inspector with the Canadian Border Service. For twenty-five years now, he has been working the Canadian Customs. On 1st July 2018, he was on his duty at Pearson International Airport. Unfortunately, it was a Canada Day Holiday. They understaffed. A flight from Bogota, Colombia, landed at the terminal. Patel and other Co-staffs were on high alert for likely drug ingress. Each passenger would be scrutinized. Patel works in the primary flight department, responsible for passenger interviews and conducting the Narcotic Identification Kit tests to identify illicit drugs.
Before proceeding, please allow me to explain the charges before your honor. An illegal drug is any substance that is not authorized within the law because it is deemed harmful to a person’s life. Any person found trading on it can be prosecuted within the law upon the provision of verifiable evidence. The shipping of the drug is, therefore, prohibited because it is associated with illegal drugs that are dangerous to human health. The illegal drug threatens a person’s life, which can lead to adverse effects, including death and indecency behavior. In this charge, the accused is facing a charge of trading on a drug that is harmful to people’s lives. NIK test evidence will be used to prove this as well as the captured images of the three bottles of liquor that the defendant possessed.
Smuggling or shipping occurs if an individual tries to stealthily import an illegal drug into a country through a hidden means. One of the means a person can use is pretense. For example, packing the liquor in a unique brand cannot provide a clue to the inspection department that it is an illegal drug. This was exactly the case with Smith’s employee. Your honor, the jury will clearly hear the evidence to support the claim from four witnesses, Mr. Sameer Patel and the other three co-staffs at the time of the incident.
On 1st July 2018, Mr. Petal met the defendant in the primary checkup line. This is a place for interviewing passengers first before sending them to the secondary line. Patel had to perform most of the duties as his colleagues were also held up. He asked the agent his country of origin, and he responded he was from Colombia. Patel became more curious about him because Columbia is highly associated with Cocaine sales. Subsequently, he asked why the accused went down the tunnel there, and the defendant replied that it was for a trip. This made him suspicious because the agent was alone without a family. The accused revealed that he was an agent of John smith’s independent import/export company. Patel was suspicious and decided to take pictures of the agent’s three luggage bottles. Patel conducted a NIK (Narcotic Identification Kit. They turned out to be cocaine. The accused accepted he bought them in Colombia.
Subsequently, the other three staff asserted that they saw the defendant possessing three bottles. However, they did not have a chance to determine the content of the bottles because they were busy attending to other clients. The three claimed that Patel attended to him.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, in a criminal trial, it is the responsibility of the Crown to prove their case. The court system relies on the defendant being innocent until proven guilty. The implication is that it is the Crown’s responsibility to prove the suspect’s guilt. This is an enormous responsibility, and we do not recklessly bring people to court. We bring people to court when we are convinced of their guilt.
Today, we, the Crown, are convinced of the guilt of Mr. John’s agent. We will show that he committed shipping the illegal drug (cocaine). Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, consider the evidence tabled. Pay attention to the facts. Reach a verdict based on your logic and judgment. Let the facts dictate your final decision. When all is said and done, we firmly believe the jury will prove Mr. John’s agent is guilty and punish him in accordance with the law regarding illegal drug smuggling. Moreover, we will respect the jury’s decision even if it goes against our wish because we believe it is an impartial entity.
