Law and Politics

Start Free Trial

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.

Thanks

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

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. 

Approved by eNotes Editorial
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Closing statement for the following case needed. My problem here is that I cannot use any information or facts from outside :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.   So here my problem is that this is the only information I have, which I can use. So, to work with such a limited amount of information is hard. I cannot get any arguements to prepare a closing statement. Please help.   P.S. : This is the only information given to me. ( CASE )   Thanks

I think there are a couple of approaches you could take to this case. The first would be to emphasize that she is a Canadian citizen and that preventing her from returning to Canada is not actually possible under the framework of international law. She also has a right to be tried in Canada if she is actually accused of a crime. If she committed a crime in the United States, there would still be a problem with extradition, because Canada cannot extradite criminals to countries that have the death penalty except under very specific circumstances. Thus you need to ignore the extraneous information and focus on  her citizenship.

See eNotes Ad-Free

Start your 48-hour free trial to get access to more than 30,000 additional guides and more than 350,000 Homework Help questions answered by our experts.

Get 48 Hours Free Access
Last Updated on