If I could have you look to my left you will notice my client. "George if you would could you please stand up". My client mentor, companion and care taker of lennie, is on trial for the saving of a human being from misery. This is not a case of murder or homicide, but rather a case of friends helping out friends. It has been clearly stated and proven that Lennie was killed in the most humane way possible separating the brain from the spinal column. This death would take about 5 seconds where the heart would stop and the victim would be pronounced dead. From our previous witness Slim, we have we have been informed that Curly stated "I'm gonna shoot the guts outta that bastard myself". Now will the jury ask them selves, what is a more inhumane way to die? A quick death without pain, or suffering for hours while your insides slowly slip out of your body and onto the ground, a death like this could go on for hours or even days with the victim fully aware of the pain. Now lets switch something up here for a second. Imagine that George had not killed Lennie and let Curly do the job. Say Curly was brought into this courtroom and put on trial. Would Curly be convicted of murder? Or would the jury give sympathy for the death of his wife? Most likely curly would not be convicted of any crime. In a way George is in a similar situation. My client was backed into a corner with the facts that his best friend, long time companion would die a suffering and very painful death. Every person in this court room knows what Lennie's fate would have been that day, whether we like it or not that day on the river side was Lennie's time to go. Members of the jury I would like to ask you to think of this situation. George had a reason for killing Lennie just as Curly had, the only difference is George's reason was not of malicious thoughts and was in the best interest of Lennie. I know there isn't
             ...