Verdict+SooJin

__**VERDICT**__
• concise 250-300 words (word count excludes quoted material) • states clearly why Position 1 or Position 2 ‘won’ the trial • use at least one piece of textual support that was key to the winning argument

Was the following statement PROVED OR DISPROVED in the trial? “The world and everything in it is unplanned accident, existence is meaningless; the past is irrelevant; nothing matters.”

I think the statement “The world and everything in it is unplanned accident, existence is meaningless; the past is irrelevant; nothing matters.” was disproved in the trial; Position 2 had more reasonable arguments than position 1. From the beginning, some of the points made in the opening statement presented by the lawyer of position 1 did not support their thesis. (What does students sleeping in 3 a.m. have to do with this topic?) Also lawyers in position 2 sometimes did not communicate effectively with their witnesses. Even some witnesses mentioned thoughts that contradicted their thesis. The lawyers in position two did a good job in questioning the witnesses in position 1 during cross examination; they pointed out their weak arguments. There were two or three people for Dragon and Grendel, and only a few of them had reasonable arguments; some ideas were contradicting their thesis and some didn't even talk much. The witnesses in position 2 did a better job stating their arguments clearly and not repeating them compared to witnesses in position 1. There were two quotes that disproved the statement “The world and everything in it is unplanned accident, existence is meaningless; the past is irrelevant; nothing matters.” was "For every one of us, living in this world means waiting for our end. Let whoever can win glory before death. When a warrior is gone, that will be his best and only bulwark (Beowulf, page 97, Line 1386-1389)" and "He reshaped the world," I whispered, belligerent. "So this name implies. He stared strange-eyed at the mindless world and turns dry sticks to gold." (Grendel page 42). I thought these two quotes are the strongest textual support that was key to the winning argument. Overall, I think the lawyers in position 2 did a better job in communicating with the witnesses; all the questions were well prepared and there was no problem during direct examination and cross examination. Throughout the trial, the most well-addressed facts were existence is meaningful and the pass is relevant, proven by the cases of famous heroes in the history of the Danes.