Today, we find ourselves at the heart of a controversy over words—mere words—that my client, a private citizen, expressed in a moment of personal opinion. The prosecution would have you believe that by saying, “No cops deserve donuts,” my client committed some grievous offense. But I ask you—since when did expressing a view about breakfast pastries become a crime?
Let’s analyze this statement logically. Nowhere did my client call for harm, advocate for violence, or incite any illegal action. They did not say police officers should be denied their legal right to purchase donuts, nor did they interfere with any officer’s access to baked goods. At worst, this is an unpopular opinion about who is deserving of a treat—nothing more, nothing less.
The First Amendment of the United States Constitution explicitly protects free speech, including statements that may be controversial, divisive, or even offensive to some. Are we to live in a society where expressing a strong opinion about food allocation becomes a legal matter? If my client had said, “No lawyers deserve coffee,” would we be standing in this courtroom today? I think not.
The prosecution may argue that this statement was meant as an insult, but let’s be honest—police officers, like all of us, are no strangers to criticism. Their service, though invaluable, does not place them above public commentary. Furthermore, let us not ignore the playful, perhaps even tongue-in-cheek, nature of this statement. Are we to criminalize sarcasm? Ban humor? Outlaw pastry preferences?
Ladies and gentlemen, my client did not deny officers their rights. They did not prevent a single donut transaction. They did not issue a call to arms against glazed or jelly-filled pastries. They simply shared a personal viewpoint—one that, while perhaps controversial in certain coffee shops, is well within their legal rights.
At the end of the day, I trust you to make the right decision: to uphold the principles of free speech, reject this absurd overreach, and find my client not guilty of the so-called “crime” of having an opinion.
DEFENSE ATTORNEY’S OPENING STATEMENT
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury,
Today, we find ourselves at the heart of a controversy over words—mere words—that my client, a private citizen, expressed in a moment of personal opinion. The prosecution would have you believe that by saying, “No cops deserve donuts,” my client committed some grievous offense. But I ask you—since when did expressing a view about breakfast pastries become a crime?
Let’s analyze this statement logically. Nowhere did my client call for harm, advocate for violence, or incite any illegal action. They did not say police officers should be denied their legal right to purchase donuts, nor did they interfere with any officer’s access to baked goods. At worst, this is an unpopular opinion about who is deserving of a treat—nothing more, nothing less.
The First Amendment of the United States Constitution explicitly protects free speech, including statements that may be controversial, divisive, or even offensive to some. Are we to live in a society where expressing a strong opinion about food allocation becomes a legal matter? If my client had said, “No lawyers deserve coffee,” would we be standing in this courtroom today? I think not.
The prosecution may argue that this statement was meant as an insult, but let’s be honest—police officers, like all of us, are no strangers to criticism. Their service, though invaluable, does not place them above public commentary. Furthermore, let us not ignore the playful, perhaps even tongue-in-cheek, nature of this statement. Are we to criminalize sarcasm? Ban humor? Outlaw pastry preferences?
Ladies and gentlemen, my client did not deny officers their rights. They did not prevent a single donut transaction. They did not issue a call to arms against glazed or jelly-filled pastries. They simply shared a personal viewpoint—one that, while perhaps controversial in certain coffee shops, is well within their legal rights.
At the end of the day, I trust you to make the right decision: to uphold the principles of free speech, reject this absurd overreach, and find my client not guilty of the so-called “crime” of having an opinion.
Thank you.
Opinions are like butts
This took 3000% more effort than strictly necessary and I value every drop of it.
That was beautiful. Thanks for a fun read.