The hero's girlfriend (heroine) is accused as an accessory for an assassination attempt at an official function which the hero, a badass bookworm from the nobility, foiled.Those who really collude with the assassination attempt tries to make the heroine a scapegoat because she comes from an impoverished background from a close knit communities which contains members are known to hate the government. She is however, an exemplary squadette which is why the hero could get her into his security retinue. Now for the trial:
The prosecution says that the assassins come in through the group of performers who hails from the same community as hers and she had helped them in getting into the function.
The defence says that her presence at the security preparation of the event is only as an observer so that she know what to do to protect her boss if something goes wrong and actually have no say in who is getting approved for doing the entertainment. All the help she gave them is pointing in the right directions.
The prosecution says that she had known the performers and in fact was a member of the troupe previously and says that she is a part of an elaborate to infiltrate the state.
The defence says that this is pure speculation and state that she is exemplary throughout her service and had not her boss had personally asked for her to be his security she might as well be sent to some far flung section of the state.
The defence said that she is involved in stopping the assassins which shows that it is unlikely she will be involved.
The prosecutor said it is because her boss had done so much damage to the attempt that she decides the attempt had failed.
The case is rigged but I would really appreciate if someone could comment on this and also provide better argument for both sides.
edited 21st Oct '10 9:35:16 PM by Blurring