The three little pigs are criminals
Debate Rounds (3)
Your Honour, My clients are innocent of 1st degree murder. sure, they erected houses without a building permit, but the deceased was intent on Eating them! These are the Deceased last words, and I quote
" I'll huff, and I'll puff, and I'll blow your house in"
Vandalism in the highest degree! Not only was the deceased intent on eating them, but on house defamation and Vandalism!
My clients acted in self defense, and did not murder that Wolf!
The wolfs words "I'll huff, and I'll puff, and I'll blow your house in" were only words to try and scare the pigs away, they were not words that meant that the wolf wanted to kill the pigs.
Vandalism doesnt have anything to do with the wolf blowing down the houses and so I object that argument.
The pigs burn, cook and kill the wolf. This is crime as they are murdering an animal and just living happily ever after.
Order in the Court! Order in the Court, God Damn it!
The Plaintiff makes incorrect and illogical statements, given the nature of the Wolfs intrusion.
Yes, the pigs committed a Minor Misdemeanor by constructed houses without a permit, but the Deceased Defendant was guilty of attempted Murder!
The Deceased had no right to destroy the pigs property, and to threaten harm to them. My Clients also wish to state they have the right to defend themselves!
Your Honour, my clients DID NOT murder that wolf! The deceased Illegally and without warning attempted to break in to the Pigs house, so my Clients acted wisely and lit the Fireplace in self defense.
The Wolf is guilty of the Following charges.
Defacing of Private Property
Attempted Break and Enter
All these added up outweigh the Charge of no building permit pointed out by the Plaintiff.
The wolf was NOT breaking private property because the pigs only just decide that their going to build a so called 'house' and so it is not private property. The wolf gave them a warning to get out of their 'house' but the pigs rejected the offer' so it is the pigs fault.
The wolf was not stalking the pigs. You have most likely experienced someone chasing you and that is not stalking.
No where in the story does it say that the wolf was trying to kill the pigs so there was no attempted murder.
Lastly, the pigs have no right to eat the big animal as itis disrestpectful and harming nature. It is already bad enough that the pigs killed the wolf, but the pigs EATING the wolf is disrespectful and unfair to the wolf.
To sum up, the pigs had no council permission for THREE houses especially how the material was insufficent, they DID murder a wolf and disrespected it horribly by eating it and thats final!
Your Honour, the Plaintiff makes some controversial statements concerning the circumstances.
The Pigs acted in Self defence, as the Wolf was breaking into their house.
They had the Legal obligation to defend themselves from an unknown threat in there home, regardless.
The Deceased Vandalized and destroyed TWO domains of the Pigs, contempt to destroy the third, Attempted to Eat all three, and broke into my Clients house.
I Believe it"s fair to say who is in the wrong.
Your Honour, I've provided you and the Jury with sufficient evidence to support and defend my Clients. Case Closed.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.