The Instigator
Rami
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
SirMaximus
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Fairy Tale Court Case: Goldilocks

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/6/2015 Category: Funny
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,171 times Debate No: 77330
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)

 

Rami

Con

So, I want to do a court case on the charges of Goldilocks breaking and entering, minor theft, and vandalism. I will be the lawyer for the three bears, while Pro will be the lawyer for Goldilocks. Please note: I have no idea how a real court case goes, so I ask Pro or commenters to help me. For this reason, first round is acceptance only.
SirMaximus

Pro

I accept. I will defend Goldilocks.
Debate Round No. 1
Rami

Con

I don't think I can make this similar to a real court case, so we will debate whether or not she will be charged. I start with the evidence that Goldilocks did indeed commit those three crimes.

1: Breaking and entering
A. The three bear claim to have found Goldilocks in their residence, in the bedroom, on a bed.
B. The door to the bears' residence was found unlocked.

2: Minor Theft
A. Portions of porridge were found missing at the bears' home.
B. Stool samples have found that Goldilocks had consumed porridge around the time she is suspected of entering the bears' residence.

3: Vandalism
A. A chair was found in ruins at the bears' residence.
B. Two other chairs were found with noticeable marks on them.
SirMaximus

Pro

Goldilocks is a very young child, and so she is unfit to know the nature of crimes. She does not know right from wrong, and so can not be considered a criminal. Furthermore, it is possible that the bears may have left their door unlocked before leaving their house. Therefore, if that was the case, then Goldilocks did not break into their house.
Debate Round No. 2
Rami

Con

Goldilocks's claims that Goldilocks is a young child, so therefore she should not be charged. However, when she sat on Papa bear's there were noticeable marks on the chair, as Papa bear said, "Hey, someone was one my chair" (or something like that). Presumably, Papa Bear sat in the chair before, and it likely was built to sustain great weights, as black bears can weigh 125 to 600 pounds [1]. A child, even a abnormal obese, should theoretically not weigh this much. It is much more likely that Goldilocks is an overweight adult than an overweight child.
SirMaximus

Pro

It is possible that Papa Bear had actually not sat down in the chair before. It is possible that his chair was new, which would explain why he was so disturbed when he noticed the marks on the chair. Therefore, it is also possible that Papa Bear had mistakenly bought a chair that was meant for humans and not for bears. If that was the case, then it is not unreasonable to say that a small child sitting on the chair could have caused marks to appear. Furthermore, I argue that the bears do not have constitutional rights, so they cannot legally press charges against a human being, let alone one who is very young.
Debate Round No. 3
Rami

Con

Rami forfeited this round.
SirMaximus

Pro

I am currently out of power at my house and I have to use my phone, which is on low battery, so I can only make a short argument. To be clear, bears don't have constitutional rights, so they cannot press charges against a human, much less one who is very young. I await my opponent's argument.
Debate Round No. 4
Rami

Con

The main basis of Pro's argument is that we are dealing with bears here, and therefore they respectively are not as intelligent as humans and do not have constitutional rights. However, these 'bears' can speak, which means that they could not be real bears. The only logical explanation is that these are humans wearing realistic bear costumes (something with a human responsible).

To prove Goldilocks was over 18, I figured that I would have to cross off who she wasn't. To start, Goldilocks couldn't be too young, otherwise, she wouldn't have been able to break the chair. She couldn't have been too old, or she wouldn't be able to jump out of bed quickly. Some more facts: The bears were eating porridge, which leads me to conclude it happened in the morning. Goldilocks also fell asleep. She must have not slept enough that night, which leads me to think that she is a criminal on the run who spent the night running away from the police. A runaway kid would have likely stayed in populated areas to get a job. The majority of criminals are over 18.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...

Interesting side point: In the original story, Goldilocks is an old woman without a name. Since I wrote Goldilocks in the title of this debate, I find it unfair to bring it in as an argument. Here is the story:
https://en.wikipedia.org...

In my last argument, I forgot to put a source. Here it is:
http://www.americanbear.org...
SirMaximus

Pro

My opponent says that, since the bears can speak, they must be humans wearing realistic bear costumes. However, it is possible that the story takes place in a parallel universe where bears can speak like humans do.

My opponent says that, since Goldilocks was able to break the chair, she must have not been too young. I agree. However, it is possible that she is around 17, meaning that she is not necessarily an adult. She is innocent until proven guilty, so until it is proven that she is 18 or over, she cannot be arrested. My opponent also says that she must not have slept enough, as she fell asleep during what was probably the morning, so she's a criminal on the run who was running from the police in the night. It is possible that she hadn't slept enough the night before, but this doesn't mean that she's a criminal on the run. She might just be someone who suffers from insomnia.

Voters, please vote Pro. Goldilocks has not been proven to be guilty, and she is innocent until proven guilty. Make the right decision, voters.
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Rami 1 year ago
Rami
Okay.
Posted by SirMaximus 1 year ago
SirMaximus
I don't think that's gonna work. The system is automatic, so if you don't answer by today, then it'll just go to my turn and it won't let you answer until I'm done. If I post my argument today or tomorrow, you'll be able to post an argument on Sunday, but that won't change the fact that you'll have forfeited Round 4. Sorry, but it's not up to me. That's just how the system on this site works. If I could, I would let you post on Sunday.
Posted by Rami 1 year ago
Rami
I still want time to think about this, but I don't have access to a computer tomorrow. I ask Pro to let me post my argument on Sunday. If he disagrees, then I accept the forfeit.
Posted by Rami 1 year ago
Rami
Well, you got me there. The only argument I could think of is that the story never tells us her age. Still, it does say she was a young girl. I wanted this argument to be about whether or not the bears had rights. Also, I thought the story went that she picked the locked. I now realize I was mistaken. I'll let SirMax decide what he wants to do with the rest of the story.
Posted by SirMaximus 1 year ago
SirMaximus
@anime-arguments: Thank you! :)
Posted by anime-arguments 1 year ago
anime-arguments
I agree with the defendant. Goldilocks clearly did not understand what she was doing when she entered the house, and charging her for a crime she unknowingly committed seems unjust. Also, are there age limits on when you can and cannot charge people in this way? Even if Goldilocks is convicted, what would the punishment be for such a small child?
Posted by TheOpinionist 1 year ago
TheOpinionist
Bears do not have Constitutional Rights, and therefore, the inability to press charges against Goldilocks
Posted by Rami 1 year ago
Rami
Well, Pro could try to claim the bears don't have rights.
Posted by ChickenBakuba 1 year ago
ChickenBakuba
The odds are overwhelmingly in Con's favour...
Posted by ChickenBakuba 1 year ago
ChickenBakuba
There goes my favourite fairy tale when I was a child...

"So, I want to do a court case on the charges of Goldilocks breaking and entering, minor theft, and vandalism. I will be the lawyer for the three bears, while Pro will be the lawyer for Goldilocks. Please note: I have no idea how a real court case goes, so I ask Pro or commenters to help me. For this reason, first round is acceptance only."

</3 Goldilocks
No votes have been placed for this debate.