Are you sure?

Comfirm Cancel


Or Login using BecomeGorgeous


Please fill the form below and follow the further instructions.

By registering, you are agreeing to the terms and conditions.
We will not sell, rent or give your email to anyone so don't worry about spam.

Password Recovery

You are about to receive a email from us please make sure to check your spam or junk folder and add our email [email protected] to your contact list.

Thank you!

Alli Burroughs




22 May 1996

Call me whatever you want. Alli, Allison whichever.
Imma freshhmann.
JV Cheer; Marching Band.
Singlee and not lookinn'.
My eye color changes between blue and green, 'cause I'm special.;)
I dye my hair.. its natural color is blondee.
I think people misunderstMore saduisahduiash dsau

  • 146 Rank

  • 375 Points

Published on: 01 Oct 2009 by unefille

Boston Massacre CSI (Grade My Paper)

Boston Massacre CSI

Ladies and gentlemen, people of the jury, I hereby state that the British soldiers are innocent of murder. I say this because, the colonists were armed just like the British, the British were in just as much danger as the colonists, a colonist struck a soldier, and the British only shot in self defense.

The British were armed with guns, the colonists were armed with very large sticks. Both sides were able to defend themselves when needed. They were all at risk of receiving an injury. They could even face the life ending tragedy of death.

 The colonist’s sticks can do just as much damage as the British's guns. If a colonist were to strike a soldier hard enough he could kill the soldier or break a bone. A hit to the abdominal area could very well cause internal bleeding. A strike to the head could cause bleeding of the brain. Both of these examples could very well end the life of a soldier. Both guns and sticks can kill.

 It was simply shouting and making threats. Then, a colonist decided to act. He struck a British soldier on the shoulder. This could've broken the soldiers shoulder.

When the soldier responded to the hit with the shooting of his gun, the other British soldiers began to shoot as well. They believed the were all in danger. As in, rather than the colonists holding the sticks and making no use of them, they began to make use of them. British were firing in self defense and nothing more.

 My closing argument is, that if one colonist hadn't struck the British soldier a gun wouldn't have been fired that night. Also, the British were shooting in self defense. They were not shooting defenseless colonists either, both sides had their own weapons. If anyone is at fault here it is the now dead colonist. 

*Give it a grade.



Add a Comment

* Please Add A Comment


Thank you for submission! Your comment will be displayed after getting approval from our administrators.

Connect With
Or Pick a name