A Handbook for Public Prosecutors

38. Final Submissions

Chapter 38 FINAL SUBMISSIONS At the close of the case for the defence, both the public prosecutor and the defence are allowed to make final submissions as provided by sections 201 and 233 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The purpose of final submissions The purpose of final submissions is that both the public prosecutor and the defence can explain to the court the main facts, which each has established, the strength of those facts and the conclusions that ought to be drawn from those facts. The public prosecutor, therefore, will endeavour to show in his speech that the facts brought out in favour of his case are strong enough to prove the offence charged beyond reasonable doubt; that his witnesses should be believed to be witnesses of truth; that any discrepancies in their evidence were on trivial matters which did not shake the substance of the evidence as a whole; and that the defence has not raised any reasonable doubt against the prosecution’s case. The defence, on the other hand, will endeavour to persuade the court that the prosecution’s story has been concocted; or that there were material contradictions in the whole testimony; or that the defence case is believable or that at the very least it has clearly raised reasonable doubt and so the accused is entitled to an acquittal. What you need for final submissions Final submissions are, therefore, not mechanical. A final submission must be done intelligently. To be able to use it to advantage, you need to master the facts, organise the mass of materials brought out in the course of the trial, prepare your speech and attain the art of persuasion. For facts, you need to work; and preparation of your speech, you need to work. But the art of persuasion can only be attained with experience. Master the facts Final submissions must be based on the facts brought out in the course of the trial. It is therefore imperative that you should be conversant with all those facts. Courts do not take kindly to mistakes as to what has been said in court by the witnesses. You must know what each witness has said or omitted to have said. You must refer to facts and their interrelationship and how they destroy the defence case or weaken it. Organize your materials Having mastered the facts, the next thing is to sort the facts out so that you can refer to them easily without fumbling. In a lengthy trial, or where witnesses did not testify in the order in which the events occurred, you will find that there is a mass of materials seemingly irreconcilable. Draw them up in headed notes so that the main facts come out clearly. See which ones are reconcilable and which ones are not. In other words, write all of them down – including those against your case. Thereafter, find out the details which agree with the main facts on either side. Having done that, you are now in a position to prepare your speech. Preparation of final submissions A final submission should have three parts: an introduction, the body, and the conclusion. An introduction can consist of a brief reference to the charge and the basis of the prosecution’s case, that is, what the prosecution had set out to prove. The speech should then set out the main issues; and the main facts brought out by the evidence of both sides. It then goes on to analyse the evidence in as much detail as may be necessary, emphasizing all important points in favour of the prosecution or the defence, as the case may be. In other words, points in favour of, say, the prosecution, will be highlighted and weaknesses, or contradictions explained away on the ground, say, that the events were quickly moving. For the prosecution, having reviewed the evidence for the prosecution, the public prosecutor should turn to the evidence of the defence. Here the duty of the public prosecutor is to discredit the evidence of the defence. By reference to its inherent weaknesses or by contrasting it with the prosecution’s case, the public prosecutor can describe the defence case in such a way as to 262 Part IV The Art of Conducting Cases make it appear as an afterthought, worthless, ridiculous or highly improbable . To do this, you must attack what appear to be strong points in the defence and dramatize strong points...