I need a closing statement for this case.
I am representing the government ( CROWN )
Patel v. The queen
Shaili Patel, a crusading young lawyer and citizen of canada, is prevented by customs officials from returning home to Canada from her studies in the United States. The Government of Canada claims that Ms. Patel is in league with Known terrorists and posses a threat to Canadian national security if she is allowed to return to Canada. Ms. Patel maintains she is simply a Young Democrat and an opponent of the Bush Administration who has takes part in anti-Bush demonstrations in Washington and Ottawa. The Government appeals to the Anti-terrorism Act to justify its actions.
P.S : I have a small debate tomorrow, so just looking for few points to have a good closing statement.
As you can imagine, this is a highly charged topic. For a closing statement, you will need to know what you are up against.
First, by the name Patel, you will be seen a racially profiling people. So, you must make it clear that you have not done this. In liberal democracies, this will be frowned upon.
Second, for a closing statement you will need to go over the evidence again and appeal to the probable cause of your case. In light of this, I would go over the anti-terrorism act and suggest that no laws were broken, no civil liberties were abused, and that everything was done for the protection of the people. Most important, this person in view is a possible threat.
Third, it would be good to go over the evidence afresh, so that the people there will know that there is probable cause. So, for instance, if the person was caught on tape talking with known-terrorists, say this. If this person has made violent remarks against the state, show this as well.
Finally, I will add a link to the anti-terrorism act.