So as we find out, Oedipus' life does now suck but I guess it could be worse as Jocasta is dead. What a horrible thing to find out that your life is all just a lie. The idea of whose fault is this is a constant battle in literature. Another battle is what was true punishment and who should have been punished.
For this evening:
Choose either Oedipus and his murder of Lauis or Jocasta and her trying to kill Oedipus as an infant. Then, take the side of a defense attorney who will defend them of any guilt for this crime. Write an opening statement to the judge and jury explaining why they should not be found guilty using examples from the story to back up your opinion. Use 3 examples. This will clearly end up more than 7 sentences.
54 comments:
Oedipus should not be found guilty to the crime of killing Lauis. There are numerous reason supporting my statement. Many diffrent things happened to Oedipus which lead him to murdering Lauis. First, Oedipus wouldn't even have been going to the town of Thebes if he had not been living in Corinth. As a baby Oedipus's ankles were peirced, and he was left to die in the woods. Luckily, a poor peasant found him and took him to Corinth, preventing him for dying. Why should Oedipus be punished for killing Lauis when Lauis himself was planning on killing Oedipus? Next, Oedipus had to deal with many tragic events. Knowing that he killed his father and married his mother, must be hard punishment enough. Oedipus should not have to go through any more punishment than he already has. Finally, Oedipus has already punished himself more than he needed to. As you can see, he has blinded himself because of the horrible events that have occured. No longer will Oedipus be able to see, and he must live with the horrible memories that haunt him. In conlusion, I ask of you to please understand how Oedipus must be feeling. Free him of anymore punishments, because of how many he has already had to go through. Thank you very much.
Becca Need
3rd Hour
I will choose the murder of Lauis. Yes we all know that Oedipus killed Lauis, but i beleive that Oedipus was just trying to protect himself. When they met at the cross roads Lauis ran over Oedipus' foot. Oedipus got upset and started get in a fight. Now what would you have done. Lauis and many other men were fighting one man. If Oedipus did not kill Lauis then chances are that Lauis and his men would have killed him. So Oedipus may have been the victim in this case. Being attacked by more men it just so happened that one of those men were the king. Oedipus also should not be found guilty because \he did a better job as king than Lauis. In ancient roman times a bunch of emporers were killed and then those people that killed the emperor became emperor. So Oedipus was actually doing a favor for the people of thebes. Lauis was a good king but Oedipus was better. Another thing is that Lauis also had tryed to kill Oedpus when he was a child, even though Oedipus did not know that. So Oedipus should not be at fault. For alll that Oedipus has gone through he should be looked as as a hero.
Zack Ruffin
Jocasta should not be guilty for trying ti kill oedipus when he was an infant, although it may sound bad i have a good reasons y this woman should be inecent one, it is her child she can do what she wants with it two, the prophecy sai the child wold kill his father and marry his mother so she had to try to prevent this from coming true and three she slept with her son and that alone is punishment enough
Oedipus should not be provin guilty to the crime of Lauis. Thus because many reasons. His parents are due to blame, this is because if he was thrown to the curb. Then as he grew up he had to travel to Thebes because he was banished. On his way he was approached by a chariot when men attempted to attack him in which my client defended himself. If his parents would of just took on the responsibility and raised him then he would of never been in this situation in the first place. Another reason that my client is not guilty for is the fact that Lauis tried to kill my client. As my client knows that he himself killed his father is enough punishment and it is disappointing as it sounds. Oedipus did not know the truth and when he found out his heart was broken.
Your honor, my client Oedipus is in fact an innocent man. For one reason, there was no eye witness at the scene of the crime which if you have nobody there to witness it you cannot prove that Oedipus was the murderer. Secondly my client is being accused of killing king Lauis by somebody who is blind. The blind mans only reason for blame against my client comes from an Oracle that may be right, but is most likely wrong. And my final reason for why my client Oedipus is innocent is because there has been no knowing that Oedipus crossed that road to get from Corinth to Thebes, this all reverts itself back to there being no eye witnesses. Your honor, i have no further statements.
Will Michaels 2nd hour
We are not here to question the matter whether Oedipus is guilty of killing his father. These facts have been presented to us and Oedipus has admitted that he killed his father (King Lauis). What we are questioning is the tragic chain of events that have led up to this terrible tragedy. First when Lauis and Jocasta were told by the oracles that their son would murder his father & marry his mother. Lauis and Jocasta gave their son (Oedipus) to a shepherd to be killed. In order to change the future and tempt the gods I find fault with Lauis and Jocasta.
The shepherd that Oedipus was given knew the prophecy and decided to let him life. He chose to let Oedipus live and tempt the fate of the gods.
One thing of great importance is that it was Lauis temper & attempt to kill Oedipus at the crossroads that caused him his own life. It was Lauis that try bludgeoning his own son with a stick that brought his death upon himself.
Polybus & Merope never revealed to Oedipus that he was not their own son. If they had only been honest with him he might have not run when he was told of the prophecy. Oedipus left so that he would not kill Polybus & Merope.
Had the people in Oedipus' life been truthful to him and not tempted fate things might have turned out differently. Oedipus defended himself from Lauis and had the misfortune of having this terrible prophecy being placed upon him.
Oedipus was a great King to Thebes and has suffered greatly. He has lost his mother, father, family, and children. Oedipus is a victim in this tragedy and should be found innocent of any wrong doing.
I have choose to defend Jocasta with and her trying to kill Oedipus as an infant. The reason i have choose to defend Jocasta is because i find there are many correct reasons why this should have been done. First, let me remind you that at this point in life, everything said by an oricle was taken as the truth and that it would happen. With this in mind, Jocasta was told by an oracle that Oedipus would be much trouble and that he was going to end up killing his father and marrying his mother. The oracle then recomenned to get rid of the child emidiatley. Going by the fact that the oricles are always right, Jocasta did not hesitate and gave the baby to a slave and order him to put the baby to death. Another reason i feel that Jocasta is not guilty is due to the fact that overall Oedipus was not even killed. You can not sentence some body for something that was not acctualy done. Lastly is the fact that all though Oedipus dodged the bullet of being killed he still grew up and eventualy landed in the place of killing his father and marrying his mother. The oracle was correct and that is why i feel that Jocasta shall be innocent. She attempted to stop Oedipus at a young age because she knew that this plot and Oedipus's future seen would eventually happen unless he was put to death.
conman
I chose Jocasta and her trying to kill Oedipus. Although it is a terrible crime to kill your own child, Jocasta is innocent. First, she recieved news from an oracle that one day Oedipus will kill his father and marry his mother. Clearly this was just self defense because then the king wouldnt get killed and Jocasta wouldn't be harmed. Second, Lauis was a very good king. He made all well in Tibius and when he left the country was taken over by the Sphinx. By killing Oedipus, Jocasta knew that she would be saving Tibius and the people in it. If the great king (Lauis) died, she knew the people would suffer. So Jocasta put the people first, which is what great rulers do. Third, she knew if the oricle came true many would suffer due to Oedipus. This turned out to be correct. For example: the town went hungry, people were being wrongly accused of plotting and murder, and many lost faith in the Gods. This clearly shows that Jocasta is innocent because she was doing what was best for hundreds of people.
Kristen Pauly
2nd hr.
3rd hour
Judge and jury, Oedipus does not deserve punishment for the crime of the murder of Laius. As a child, Oedipus was destined for failure by the Gods, but he did a great deal of good in spite of this. When he was just a child, he was given away to be killed, not wanted by his own parents. When he grew, he then too heard of his destiny from the oracle, and left to save the people he thought he could call his parents. Out of this great act came the prosperity of our city. If it were not for Oedipus, our city could still be haunted by the sphinx. Oedipus was the one who saved us all. He has been nothing but a great leader, a leader of the people. On the way, Oedipus had gotten into a fight with his father, who was stranger to him. Oedipus was the reason for our troubles today, but it was unknown to him. He was persistent to bring Thebes back to its original state. If the blame of the death should be proclaimed, then it should point to Jocasta and Laius. They were the parents who tried to kill their innocent infant. If it were not for their attempt to kill their son, Oedipus would not have been in the position his is in today. He would have known who his true mother and father was, and therefore would not have killed them, being the great man that he is. Now Oedipus has to live with the burden of his father's and mother's death, and has to face the whole city of Thebes in all his shame. If you ask me, I think that this is punishment enough.
Jocasta had to make a big decision on what to do with her baby. She and Lauis found out that he was going to end up killing her husband and marrying her. Now just think if you heard your little would grow up and do something so terrible what would you do? She thought it was best to just get rid of him. It wasnt easy for her, that was her new infant and she had to make a life changing sacrafice. She had to weigh the pros and cons. The best choice was to get rid of him. Jocasta was thinking about her, lauis, and their people. So no, Jocasta did the right thing in her mind and what was best for everyone.
I think that Oedipus should not be found gulity for the killing of King Lauis. There are alot of reasons i believe this. Alot of things happened that made it so that he was able to kill him. I f he hadnt been living in Corinth in the first place he wouldnt of been going to thebes. He would have never had the chance to kill Lauis if Jocasta had never tried to kill him. Lauis tried to kill Oedipus in the first place if he wouldnt have done that the prophecy wouldnt have come true. Dont you thing that Oedipus went throuhg enough. I mean come on his whole life was a lie. He got sent away and grew up thinking these kind loving people were his parent. Then he found out that really they werent he ended up killing his own father and sleeping wtih his mother. He maried his mother isnt that punishment enough. Think about how he is feeling. He doesnt even want to look at himself. He blinded him self and now both of his parents are dead. He is feeling horible about himself why make him feel even more horible. I believe that this man is innocent.
Katlyn TWigg 2nd HOUR
I am backing up Oedipus and his murder of Lauis. As his defense attorney, I must present this case of how he is not guilty of this crime. Yes he has a bad temper, but he did not mean to harm anyone. He was simply letting out his anger, and yes, that ended up with trouble in the end, but it was not on purpose. He didn't know that the man and servants that he killed were his birth father and his helpers. He had a run-in with these people who ran over his foot. This is what let off his anger, so my client didn't kill anyone just for the sake of it. If his birth mother never got rid of him by attempt of murder as a baby, then this incident would never have occured. So as you can see, My client should be found not guilty.
I am defending Jocasta in her attempt of murder of her son, Oedipus. Here is my opening statement. Jocasta when married to Laius was a happy women. She had a great life as queen and was happy in her marriage to a fine king and husband Lauis. The birth of their first son, Oedipus, was a joyous event and they loved their child. Jocasta received word from an oracle that Oedipus would kill his father, Lauis, a great king of Thebes, and marry his mother, herself. Jocasta immediately wanted to take precautions so that these events did not occur. Although it killed her to give her baby son away and have it be killed she did this to save not only herself but her husband and their kingdom. She thought that sacraficing one life could save one hundred others. Jocasta did not want Oedipus dead out of hatred; she did not even want him dead. In this instance she was more concerned of the future of her great nation. Also, being a mother of Oedipus she obviously did not want to marry and bear children of her own son. She also did not want to see her husband killed. Ladies and gentlemen of teh jury, I ask you to look upon Jocasta as a mere attempt to save people and her great concern of the future. She is innocent of attempted murder. It was meant to be a sacrafice to benefit many others.
Audrey
Your honor, I am defending Jocasta about the murder of Oedipus. Not only was the crime not committed, but she was justified in her reason to attempt it. First of all the oracle told her that her son would kill his father and marry his mother. Also she was recommended to kill the baby. The oracles had a powerful effect and were completely truthful. She did what she thought she had to do by ordering the baby away and to be put to death. Since this murder never took place, Oedipus grew up and had a successfull life (partially). In the end, the oracles were right with their predictions because Oedipus did indeed kill his father and marry his mother. All that Jocasta tried to do was stop this, but it ended up happening anyway. If anything I believe Oedipus should be in this trial for the actual murder of King Laius.
Oedipus should not be found guilty to the crime of killing Lauis. There are countless actions that lead Oedipus to commite these crimes. First, Oedipus wouldn't even have been going to the town of Thebes if he had not been living in Corinth. At three days old young Oedipus was sent to his death, his anchels were peirced and he was left to die. If it weren't for the Sheperd of Corinth then Oedipus would be dead and none of these actions would have taken place. So if there is anyone to blame for the dredful outcomes it is Jocasta, Lauis and the sheperd to blame. What parents would take their only and lay it to die, that isn't right to do even if he was prophized to kill his father and marry his mother. Saying that the prophicy still came true, in my opinion if they would not have tried to rid themselves of Oedipus then none of these tragities would have become true. Oedipus is any innocent man and should not have to suffer because he had parents that care about themselve more than the well being of their child. So free him not of any charges for he has already led such a dredful life.
John McLean
3rd hour
I choose to defend Oedipus and his murder of King Lauis. Oedipus should not be found guilty to the crime he committed. There many reasons why I think this. One would be that he had been through a lot when he was a baby. Getting his ankles pierced, and left to die. If it wasn't for the peasant then he would have died. If Oedipus hadn't killed King Lauis, his dad then Oedipus might have been killed by him. Another reason is that he killed him to become King. Oedipus was a better king than his father was, so I think he only killed him just to become what he wanted. Oedipus did nothing wrong. He should not be blamed for what he had done.
Katlin Gotshaw
3rd Hour.
Dear Judge and jury,
Oedipus should not be found guilty. Oedipus is the victim of a terrible crime, the oracle told of Oedipus killing his dad and bedding his mother. which came true because Jocasta threw him to the dogs as a child, and left him for dead. If Jocasta would have just kep Oedipus none of the problems Oedipus is experiencing would have happened. Now Oedipus may have killed King Lauis but that was because Lauis was giving him some crap about crossing a bridge and Oedipus took it disrespectfully. Now I think that the people of Thebes benefitted greatly from Oedipus' kingship, I mean King lauis was good but Oedipus was better. Because of Oedipus' great deeds I think he should be cleared of any pass false doings.
Oedipus should not be guilty to the murder of Lauis. There are numerous reasons supporting this. Many things happened to Oedipus up until the murder of Lauis. First, if Oedipus would of known who his real parents were in the first place, then he wouldnt of fled to the town of Thebes to stay away from his "so called parents" which were really his adopted parents. Another example is why would Oedipus be punished for killing king Lauis, when Lauis was going to kill him? King Lauis and Jocasta left Oedipus to die in the forest, so really Jocasta should be punished for doing that to an innocent baby. Lastly, Oedipus already has to deal with enough punishment. He just realized that he really killed his father and was married to his mother. I think that is all the punishment he needs. But he wouldnt of been in that situation if he knew those were his parents all along. So pretty much, Oedipus's life was a big lie, so he shouldnt be punished for that.
Your honor and women and gentlemen of the jury, my client Oedipus should not be found guilty for the murder of Lauis. If anything Jocacasta, the wife of Lauis, should be found guilty for child neglegence and endangerment, and attempted murder. Jocasta pierced Oedipus' ankles when he was only 3 weeks old and ordered her helper to toss it away where noone will find him, after recieving a dark prophecy. But he could not go through with killing an innocent baby, then he met a servant of the king of Corinth and gave him the child hoping it would have a good life. None of this would have happened if Jocasta and Lauis had properly raised Oedipus. And Oedipus would have never left his place in Corinth if an old drunk had not informed him of being adopted. If the drunk had not said anything Oedipus would not have been told the prophecy that he is destined to kill his father and sleep with his mother. At the time Oedipus thought he was meant to kill his adopted parents so he tried to flee to a far away place. Then as he was finding his way to a foreign place a man, none other than Lauis himself, being carried in a carriage had his messenger attack Oedipus. So Oedipus defended himself, then the man and the others tried to attack and possibly kill him, so Oedipus defeated them and scrambled to find a place to rest. Then he came upon the city of Thebes and saved them from the evil of the sphinx, and was then made king. And when Oedipus ruled he was a ruler of the people. He was fair and just in his rule. So as you see, Oedipus is a good man.
Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of another human being with intent. Oedipus is clearly guilty in the case of Lauis's death. Granted, had his parents not sent him away Laius probably would have lived, but the reality of the situation is that regardless of the circumstances Oedipus killed Lauis in cold blood, over a simple bridge dispute. Oedipus was old enough to understand the conqequence of his actions, and therefore should be held accountable for his actions. It is proven that he had anger issues, as was demonstrated with creon and the prophet. If it was not for these anger issues, Lauis would not be dead.
Jocasta is the mother of Oedipus and the reason of the attempted murder was to follow the oracle. Jocasta was given a statement from the oracle that Oedipus would kill his father and then marry his mother later in life. Jocasta then had to make a hard decision on what to do. She had to one, kill Oedipus so she could save the king of Thebes and help protect everyone from the possible assassination, or Two, hope the oracle was wrong. When your put in that much pressure you would normally think for the group. Most oracles have a good meaning and if it was to be fulfilled the town of Thebes was in great danger of mass crisis. Jocasta decided to leave Oedipus as a new born and at least wanted to kill him before he had a chance to grow up. This is less harsh compared to killing your son at any older age. This act was more of an abortion and the parents have every right to decide on that behalf. Jocasta did the right thing in this situation and should be exempt from any punishment by the law. There is no reason to believe she just wanted her son to die. If the oracle had a different meaning Jocasta would have let her son live. There were way to many circumstances to what could happen to others. I know that it is better to sacrifice one life than it is to lose more and ruin many lives in the process. I also know that killing is unlawful and has major punishment. Jocasta did what she did to save others and is not guilty without reasonable doubt.
Jocasta is not guilty of any crime, the only thing she is guilty of is trying to save her city and beloved husband. at birth hey son Oedipus was prophesied to become a murderer. that prophet stated that Oedipus will kill his father and marry his mother. Obviously Oedipus was a danger to the the country and to Jocasta and Lauis's health. yes Jocasta did abandon her child but only to prevent future disaster and murder. because the man who was supposed to abandon Oedipus failed to do his job the country of Thebes turned into a disaster. Oedipus killed the great king of Thebes and became the pollution in Thebes. A prophet said the pollution in Thebes was because of the kings unsolved murderer, which was Oedipus. Jocasta's intentions were of the best she would rid the country of the prophesied killer, if her plan would have worked king Laius would still rule and the country of Thebes wouldn't be polluted. the town of Thebes would have been much better off is Jocasta's plan to rid Oedipus worked, then the beloved king would still be alive and the town unpolluted.
Jocasta, the great Queen of Thebes for these past prosperous years, was also the spouse and mother of one young King Oedipus. However, the question is; is she guilty of trying to kill her son when he was an infant? I say no!
The first reason is, that the oracle said he would kill his father and marry his mother. Jocasta was only trying to prevent this from happening. She was not being selfish one bit.She was merely trying to prevent her and King Laius from having tragic events thrust upon them.
My second reason is that Jocasta wasn't being selfish at all. She was merely trying to protect the town of Thebes. She knew that if word got out of the oracles vision that the town would go into panic. Then when the actual events happened the twon would become histeric.
The third and final reason for my case is that Jocasta never actually killed him. She was not at fault as she handed him off to a shepherd to give away. Sure, she did peirce his ankles, but this may have been for sacrifice to the gods. We just don't know. This doesn't prove that she tried to kill him as maybe handing him off showed that she felt she couldn't go through with it.
That is all I have to say at this time. For these reasons, Jocasta is not guilty, and she deserves no punishment. Thanks, judge and jury.
Oedipus should not be guilty to the killing of king Laius. He is completely innocent from any guilt for a lot of reasons. First off, his mother tried to kill him when he was a kid. He should of never even of existed. Another reason he is innocent is that he thought his parents were diffrent people. He had no idea he was adopted so therefore he had no idea that he killed his dad. That again is Jocastas fault. One of the last reasons that my client is is not at guilt of this crime because he wasnt even given a chance to be okay in life. Immediately at birth his feet were pierced and thrown into the woods. Doesnt everyone deserve a chance to be great? Oedipus had evil thrown upon, not born upon him. There is a huge diffrence.
Blanz
2nd
Jocasta should not be found guilty in the crime of trying to kill her infant, Oedipus. I feel that she did the right thing in trying to protect her family and country from any foolishness in the future. A queens duty is to first, protect her family. The oracle that Jocsta went to see, foretold her that her son were to kill his father and marry his mother. In her defense, she did not want her true love, Laius, to be killed by their child and she most defiantly would not want to marry Oedipus. Jocasta did what she had to do to keep her family protected. Although, this is not the only circumstance that could occur. If this prophesy where to happen then their country, Thebes , could go down with the family drama. She did not want to hurt her family as well as her country. This should say a lot about Jocasta, putting her child's life on the line to not just save her family but her country as well. I would say that this is a good example of a queen and what a queen should act upon. Now, to be more personal, how would Jocasta feel to lay with her son? That is one occasion a mother should never go through with her child. Jocasta took her family and country’s future before her own, but she also is a mother that is getting told she is going to marry her son! The thought of laying with her own son just appalls me. If that isn't a good reason to save yourself, then I don't know what is. In conclusion, the choice of trying to kill her child is a horrible thing, but to do it to save not only her family, and country, but to also save her child’s in the long run, shows that her decision was a well thought out diction to help others life along with her own.
Lauren Beattie
3rd Hour
Oedipus should not be found guilty in his murder of Lauis because it was not his fault. First of all, Oedipus was living a confused and difficult life. He was on a journey to get away from his "family" in Cornith, in order for the prophecy there to not come true. Oedipus was basicly kicked out by his real parents in order for the real prophecy to not come true, and by doing that it actualy did. If his parents didn't try to kill their own son, the prophecy might have not come true. Thirdly, Oedipus was provoked by Lauis on his journey, and anyone would get anger at this. He was antagonized and therefore, is not to blame. Lauis caused his own death at the begining when he kicked Oedipus out. Oedipus has no idea what his entire life was and is because it was so screwed up fromt he begining since his birth. He should not be considered guilty, when it was other people controlling his life, when he had no idea and was helpless.
Megan Kastelen
2nd hour
My client Oedipus should not be proven guilty for the death of King Lauis of Thebes. It should be obvious to see that evil was thrust upon this man ever since he was a child. When Oedipus was first born, his very own mother tried to kill him and leave him to die, but was unsuccessful. So why should my client be guilty? Also, when Oedipus was banished from Corinth and sent on his journey, he was attacked by the men at the crossroads. As the men tried to jump my client, he simply killed all of them in his self defense. It wasnt known that one of the men was Oedipus' own father though. And now, living with the fact that he killed his own father should be enough punishment for my client. As you know how the last part of the prophecy goes, that is also punishment for my client. The man has slept with and produced children with his own mother. Im sure as you can see my client has blinded himself, so that should well be an explanation of his guilt and sorrow. He wishes none of this ever happened, and he is not an evil man your honor; Evil was brought upon him.
i dont think Oedipus should have not been found guilty. I believe that he was only trying to protect himself. When he was younger he was given away to be killed. He was not wanted by his own mom and dad. When he grew, he then too heard of his destiny from the oracle. He was left to save the people he thought were his parents. He would have never left the town him someone whouldnt of told him. So none of it would have happen.
Oedipus killed Lauis, but he should not be found guilty for it. There are many things that led up to Oedipus killing Lauis. It was technically Lauis and Jocasta's fault it all happened. Lauis and Jocasta were the one's who had left their child to die. Lauis and Jocasta had attempted to murder Oedipus, so Oedipus shouldn’t be punished. None of this would have happened if Lauis and Jocosta hadn‘t had try to kill him. He would have actually known who his parents were so he could have eliminated the whole trip to Thebes where he had killed Lauis his father. I also think it would be punishment enough to have to know that you killed your own father. It would also be terrible to know you parents didn’t want you and they tried to kill you when you were a hopeless infinite. That would all be bad enough to have to deal with. Oedipus also blinded himself because he couldn’t deal to see himself. Oedipus knew what he did was wrong and he already punished himself and it being emotionally punished for his actions. Therefore Oedipus should not be punished for what he had done.
I think that Oedipus should not be guilty for the murder of Laius for many reasons. First, he did not set out to kill him. Oedipus happened to be passing through and they got in a little fight. It takes two people to have a fight and Laius was definently provoking him. It was taken to an extreme, but this is not all Oedipus' fault. A second reason is that Oedipus wouldn't have been traveling to Thebes if he had been living there in the first place. The reason he lived in Corinth is that Laius and Jocasta wanted to kill him as an infant but the messenger took pity on him. Oedipus should not be guilty if Laius had planned to kill him too. The last reason is that it was an accident and not done out of spite or revenge. Oedipus already had enough punishment for what he did and is now blind because he stabbed his eyes out. Nothing could really hurt him more right now and he is a good person. Sometimes bad things happen to good people.
Oedipus should not be found guilty for killing Lauis. I feel that in a way lauis and Jocasta put everything that has happened upon them. If they had not left little Oedipus to die in the forest he would never have been brought to Corinth and he would never had run away from his family. Thus he never would have fought and killed Lauis. When Oedipus was born an oracle said he would kill his father and marry his mother, instead of not listening and keeping their baby they decided to leave him to die. If they would have just ignored the prophecy and kept him I do not think these events would have ever happened. Also, Lauis started fighting with Oedipus before anything was really said. So he was trying to kill or injure Oedipus, but Oedipus won. Oedipus did kill someone, which is a crime, but he was more or less forced into doing it.
Oedipus should not be found guilty of killing King Lauis. As he was going along on his trail, and came to an intersection, Lauis cut him off starting the whole fight to begin with. When Oedipus would back down Lauis' servant struck him with a stick further encouraging Oedipus' anger. When Oedipus struck back and killed Lauis he was acting out of self defense. Because Oedipus was fleeing from the previous town he had lived in, he ended up in Thebes, and saved the city from a sphinx. Because of this action Oedipus became king. He was a king very much like king Lauis, he was a king of the people, he put the peoples needs first. Until the second plague that came over the city, Oedipus didn't let the killing of Lauis get in his way of being king and keeping his people safe and happy. When the plague came, and the prophecy was told that once the murderer of King Lauis was found and tried for his actions, Oedipus sent out a messenger to see and oracle and get a prophecy. When Oedipus received the prophecy, his anger got in the way and made him bling to the truth. Even though his anger blinded him from the truth, he was still a King of the people, and aided their needs before his.
I am going to choose Jocasta and her trying to kill Oedipus as a baby. I feel that yes it was wrong that Jocasta tried to kill her baby, however her intentions were not wrong. She was merely trying to save her husband, the city of Thebes. Therefore Jocasta is innocent. When she received the notice from the oracle that her sons destiny was to kill the king, and marry her(his mom). Of course she didn't want to marry her son, nor did she want to have her husband murdered by his own flesh and blood, so something had to be done. There was only one thing to do, and it was to get rid of him, or in other words kill him. King Laius was a beloved King and ruler. The city of Thebes worshiped the ground he walked upon. Naturally, Jocasta assumed that if the king were to die, that the people of their cities would suffer. Their people would be lost and not know what to do next. Jocasta thought she was thinking of her people. Lastly, she felt that if Oedipus replaced King Laius, that he wouldn't know how to run a city. He has never been king, and how we he know what's best for their people. In this she was right, however he did solve the riddle of the Sphinx, but since he was the killer of Laius, there was a "plague" like cruse, laid upon the city. People were suffering: they weren't able to raise their children because they were not going to be able to grow with out food, people began to lose faith in the Gods because they weren't helping the plague, and also King Oedipus was to wrapped up in his own problems. All these reasons add up to why Jocasta is innocent, and that she had good intentions when she sent her son away to die.
Alanna Nagi
2nd hour
I dont think that Oedipus was intentionly meaning to kill Lauis. He was just trying protecting himself. They were in a fight and if Oedipus wouldnt have done anything then Lauis' people would have probably killed him. At birth he was sent to his death, they pierced his ankles, left to die. If it weren't for the Sheperd then Oedipus would be dead and none of these actions would have taken place. This happened in order for the real prophecy to not come true, and by doing that it actualy did. So what pretty much happened was Lauis set up his own death. And Oedipus would have never left his place in Corinth if an old drunk had not told him he was adopted. He would have never known about it, and it wouldnt have happened.
oedipus should not be found guily on the crime of killing lauis. i truly belive thjis for many reasons. yes he accually killed him but he was not at fault. He was trying to protect himself. He had his foot ran over. If that happend to me i would have started a fight too. Also it was all fate, the oricle even stated so. If his parent never even gave him away then he would have never even killed his father or marryed his mother. His parents jump to conclusions and instean of living their life to try and preven the oricle from happening they decided to take the easier way out and kill the infant. At the crime, there is not profe or evidence concluding my client guilty. it is alll he said she said. oedipus lived his whole life a lie andits a shame that his parents did this to him.
Your honor,
Jocasta should not be found guilty for the attempted murder of Oedipus. Jocasta ultimately made a very strong important decision that she thought would better her son in the long run. Jocasta was really a thoughtful caring mother for her son Oedipus. Jocasta only wanted what she thought was best for her son. Unfortunately it had to come down to her having to make the decision to kill her young son. Also it is obvious that she was unsuccessful with the murder of Oedipus thus she should not be seen as guilty. Jocasta knew the prophecy of her young son Oedipus and it included the death of his father and the marriage of his mother. Jocasta obviously did not like this prophecy and thought for both her her son and the city that killing him would be the best route. She did however end up sleeping with her son oedipus and he did unknowingly kill his father which proved the prophecy was true. If she had killed oedipus both she and her son oedipus would be less embarrassed and better off. Your honor Jocatsa is not guilty for the attempted murder of Oedipus.
Taylor Wattles
Oedipus should not be found guilty of the murder of King Lauis. There are many reasons why he should not be found guilty. Many different things happened to Oedipus that had caused him to murder Lauis. First, Oedipus would not have shown up in Thebes if he had just been raised by parents like a normal child. Instead, he had been forced to leave and go to Corinth and then later go back to Thebes as a grown man. He had a run in with a man on the way to Thebes and they started arguing. As a result, the man and all servants but one die. The man was King Lauis, but at the time Oedipus did not know that it was King Lauis. So in all fairness Oedipus should not be charged for the murder because he was somewhat forced to do it, and he did not know that it was King Lauis at the time.
Alec Shoems
Oedipus is an innocent man and in that case should not be found guilty. Over the years he has had trials that some people could never even begin to imagine. For the first reason for him being innocent is, he had no idea who King Lauis was. Being the Prince of Coritnth Oedipus had clearly thought he had the right of way on the road not knowing Lauis was actually a king. He should not be punished because by law he did have the right away for not knowing Lauis. The second reason for his innocence is he was left for dead as a child by Jocasta and Lauis. Luckily he was found my a herdsman who gave him over to the King and Queen of Thebes. He left Thebes only because a drunken man told him of the prophecy and that he was adopted. So the jury can obviously recognize how mentality stability can be questioned. My last reason of innocence is asking you to imagine learning the secret of you actually sleeping with your mother, then seeing her kill herself. He gauged his eyes out and you want him to be punished. He has more then learned his lesson and for him to be found guilty would mean there is no justice left in the world.
Taylor Dieck
3rd hr.
Jocasta should not be guilty of trying to kill Oedipus as an infant. Although yes trying to kill your baby is a bad thing to do. Jocasta and Lauis were looking out for each other and the baby's best interest. The the orical told Jocasta and Lauis that their son was going to kill his father and marry his mother. What would you do if you heard your son was going to do that? Jocasta didn't want to marry her son and Lauis didn't want to be killed and they didn't want to have a child that would end up having a bad life because he was going to do the actions the orical said. Also by killing Oedipus Jocasta and Lauis figured out they would also be saving the city. Then they wouldn't have to worry about their king being killed by his own son. So Jocasta saw that it would be better to kill one person then have multiple people killed after their king died. And so they put their son in the forest for him to die. But, a shepard came along and picked him up to give to a family who wanted a son in a different city, thinking then he would never see him real parents and the orical couldn't come true. But many years later Oedipus came back to Thebes after hearing he was going to kill his father and marry his mother. But, he didnt know he was adopted. Oedipus soon became king of Thebes after solving the sphyinxs riddle. And after many years of prosperty, the town soon came cursed with a plauge. Without knowing the orical came true, Oedipus did marry his mother and kill his father. And that person who killed Lauis had to be killed. So in the end Jocasta was right, if Oedipus would have been killed, Thebes would have been saved and not as many people would have died of it. And so that is why she should be innocent.
Hannah Aittama
2nd Hour
Oedipus should be found innocent in the crime of killing Lauis. Oedipus was originally Lauis's son, and Lauis got rid of him because of the god's prediction that Oedipus would end up killing Lauis. Had Lauis not gotten rid of his son, Oedipus may have grown up normally and never have killed him. Another reason to this is that Oedipus should not be punished because Lauis was planning on killing Oedipus anyway. When Lauis left Oedipus out to die, he was taken by a peasant and given to the King and Queen of another town who he grew up knowing as his parents. He heard from the gods that he would end up killing his father and marrying his mother, and he thought that the parents he was with at the time were his real parents. If someone had told him that they were his adoptive parents, he would not have left his town. Oedipus is also a very great man and he saved the town from the Sphynx by solving the riddle. He was a great leader. One mistake should not outweigh years of good deeds and great leadership.
As Jocasta's attorney, I can say with 100% certainy that she is completely innocent. One example would be how when Oedipus was born, her husband and herself went to an oracle. The oracle predicted a disasterous future for their son. It was predicted that Oedipus would kill his father, Laius and marry his mother. In fear that their baby would grow up to do so, along with her husband, Jocasta tried to kill Oedipus as an infant. She is innocent because she never actually tried to kill, she sent the baby away to be killed. Another reason she is innocent and another example is obviously that Oedipus was never killed. A mother like Jocasta would never do something to her own baby unless she actually thought that it was for the better. In my opinion, she was making a decision and a sacrafice of one instead of the entire town. Lauis was a great ruler and the town of Thebes needed him. If an oracle predicted he would be killed, perhaps it would have been better for the town if Oedipus had been killed. Jocasta is clearly innocent because she meerly cared enough about this glorious town to allow her own son to be killed.
Oedipus's murder of Laius I think was unintentional. I think Oedipus should be found not guilty. The only reason Oedipus was in town was because he had to leave his old one. Oedipus thought that he was going to kill his father in his old town. Many bad things happened throughout Oedipus' life that led to this. In this incident Laius' men had also attempted to attack Oedipus therefore meaning that it was for self defense. After all theis evidence I think Oedipus should be found not guilty.
I am going to defend Oedipus. Oedipus should not be found guilty of this charge being brought upon him. There are many reasons why he should not be found guilty. Oedipus would not have needed to kill Lauis if Lauis had said who he was. Oedipus killed Lauis out of self defense. Lauis did not say who he was and had his men attack Oedipus first, so it was self defense on Oedipuses part. Oedipus, once, years ago was almost killed by his mother and father, so why should this be any different. They were not punished, why should he be. Second, there was only one man who survived the accident, and he is an old nut, he has only said what he has said out of fear, eventually everybody will say whatever they need to say just to get out of trouble. and third, Oedipus has suffered enough already. He has blinded himself because he did not know, until recently that he was the son of Lauis and Jocasta, his wife who he has been married too for awhile now. He is already living in a world that is haunting him with the guilt he has for all of this. So I ask you not to bring anymore pain upon this man, for, he already bears enough for many men. Please drop him of all the charges.
Thank you.
John Kent
12-4-09
Your honor we are hear to judge Oedipus for murdering his father King Lauis. This sad story begins when Oedipus was born, Jocasta, found out Oedipus’ fate that his will marry his mother and kill his father, so she tried to kill him by sending a servant to leave him on a mountainside. The servant instead gave him to a shepherd who gave it to the king and queen of Corinth. Raised as a prince in Corinth Oedipus gets a hint that he was adopted. He confronted his parents the king and queen of Corinth, who denied this fact. He went to an oracle to find the truth. There he learned that he would kill his father and marry his mother. Because he thought he would kill his adopted parents he left to protect them. Oedipus does not disserve any punishment for accidentally killing his father. The reports from Oedipus’ and the sole surviving servant conformed that Oedipus was provoked. When Lauis would not give right of the way on the road. Not realizing Lauis was king and his truth father. Oedipus tried to pass by Lauis. Lauis struck him. Oedipus defended him self, his honor, and his position. This is an example of self-defense or road rage not patricide. Oedipus does not disserve any punishment for accidentally killing his father.
Oedipus in not guilty for the killing of Lauis. I have many reasons for giving this statement. First and foremost, he didnt even know who Lauis was when they crossed paths. He just thought that Lauis was just another snobby rich guy. Secondly, Lauis provoked him in the first place by running over Oedipus' foot. If Lauis didn't run over Oedipus' foot Oedipus wouldn't have killed him. Finally, as a baby, Oedipus' ankles were pierced and he was thrown into a river to die. He ended up living in Corinth and hearing the prophecy his true parents(Lauis and Jocasta) heard before and ran away from Corinth to Thebes. Now, if Lauis and Jocasta hadn't have tried to kill Oedipus in the first place he wouldn't have set off to Thebes and encountered his father like he did.
James Richardson
3rd hour
Oedipus should not be found guilty of the death of his father. For example it was merely an accident that he did it. He did not even know that the man was his father and the he was the king of Thebes. Plus this never would have happen if Oedipus's mother didn't try to kill him when he was an infant. Oedipus's father and mother both left him for dead on a mountain. Another eason Oedipus should be found not guilty is because his adoptive parents should have told him he was not their real son, that would have prevented him from leaving Corinth. Oedipus should be found not guilty because his life was a punishment for him. For example his parents tried to kill him, his step parents lied to him, and he ended up marrying him mom and killing his dad.
Choose either Oedipus and his murder of Lauis or Jocasta and her trying to kill Oedipus as an infant. Then, take the side of a defense attorney who will defend them of any guilt for this crime. Write an opening statement to the judge and jury explaining why they should not be found guilty using examples from the story to back up your opinion. Use 3 examples. This will clearly end up more than 7 sentences.
Our Kind Oedipus shall not be found guilty for the murder of Lauis. Oedipus was going through many things none of us could ever imagine. First off, he was aware that as a baby, his parents left him for death, they peirced his feet and sent him into the mountains to die. Second, he was told by an Oracle he would marry his mother and kill his father. Since this had happened, he decided too flee from his family. Hearing such nonsense as he thought, would have caused any man to be angered. During this, a man who had so much bodily anger killed Lauis. He wasnt doing this because he had anything against him, he was just mad. Mad at life and the world. Mad at how he got stuck in this position, unlike many others who live great lives. Once this had passed Oedipuses horrendous luck had continued. He left Corinth to leave his parents, however he now found out they werent his real parents. Thebes was good to him, until the pollution on the land, where the soil became unfertile and the women coulddnt make children. This pollution was to be cured when they found the man who had murdered Lauis. Oedipus didnt know at the time he had murdered the King of Thebes. Now, as Oedipus finds out he is the murder, he also finds out he has fulfilled the Oracles thoughts. Lauis and Jocasta were his birth parents. The ones who pierced his feet and labeled him for death. Secondly, he had children with his mother, who was now his wife. In the last few days, Oedipus has had so much brought down onto him. I think that the embarrasment, and pain of realizing he killed his father and married his mother is enough punishment internally then ever putting him in jail. Also, as i may say again, this wasnt a crime meant to happen, he did it in anger from his bad luck. Thus i would like if you agreed with me on this and found him not guilty.
I am choosing to speak on behalf of Jocasta.
To answer the question of is my client guilty, yes. Yes, she is. She is guilty of attempting to kill one person in order to save the lives of many. He reasoning for trying to have her son killed can be justified simply. We all believe in the future seers and their tales. She was told that her son would kill his father and marry her, his mother. I want you all to think of king Laius. He loved each and every one of you. He was a good king, a noble king, a king of the people. Had he died, who would have taken over? No one that was as good as he. She was trying to save all the people from a terrible fate by sacrificing one. If you are going to convict her for trying to save all of you, then thats the real crime.
I choose to take the side of oedipus killing Lauis. I would defend Oedipus for many reasons. One, he didnt know the guy that almost hit him while he was walking, was the king? He thought the person was a trouble maker and wouldnt of thunk it was the king. Second, Oedipus was shocked by the news from the oracle. He probably reacted out of fear and anxioty. And third, Oedipus was defending himself. He reacted to defend his life from being hit by the carriage. Oedipus has a bad temper problem and just reacted of of anger. So thats why i think Oedipus is innocent.
I believe that it is more of an injustice for Jocasta to have tried to kill Oedipus while he was an infant. *Turns into defense attorney* Your honor, I believe that my clients are innocent. Oedipus is a smart individual. He was capable of solving an "unsolvable" riddle. He has become the king because of his impeccable understanding of life and his care for his people (lines 45-70). Jocasta has a unimaginable faith in Oedipus and what he can do for the town. She guides him and the town (lines 755-757, 813-836). Finally Oedipus has an undeniable longing to find the truth. He wanted to know badly if it was he who had killed his father (lines 610-626, 769-779). I rest.
absent work!!
~
~
~
~
oedipus should not be found guilty to the crime of killing lauis. i say this for many resons. one bing that his life was theretend when he met lauis on the croosroad. oedipus did what any other man would have done: protected his life. he did not relise who the man in the carrige was. this was just an act of defending himself. he was also in a very emotiolnal state when he met them. he had just let his home town family and everything he had because of the news the orical told him. he has been thorugh enough and doesnt need to go though any more pain. as you can see when oedipus found out what he had done, not only did it have a HUGE effect of his emotions, he took it to a higher level and caused phical pain to himself. i belive he has gone through enough for a very big mistake i hope you see things the way i do and let him go.
haha spelling is reaallllllyyyy bad lol no spell check!
Oedipus should not be found guilty for the murder of Laius. There is many reasons why, too. Laius invoked Oedipus' bad temper by taunting him. Oedipus wouldn't even have been traveling to the town of Thebes if he had not been in Corinth. Also, as a baby Oedipus's ankles were peirced, and he was left to die in the woods. Luckily, a poor peasant found him and took him to Corinth, so he wouldn't die. Why should Oedipus be punished for killing Lauis when Lauis tried to kill him. It's an eye for an eye. Second, Oedipus was just protecting himself. Laius ran Oedipus' bad foot and Oedipus, naturally, attacked to defend himself from further harm. Lastly, how is a boy supposed to know nay better when his parents abandoned him at birth for their own benefit? Sounds like a fitting child hood, in my opinion. Not.
Post a Comment