Prosecution

Mr. Bigelow
English 10
10 December 2015
Prosecutions closing analysis of Mr. Mabos Case
Good morning your honor and judges. Once more, my name is Yvette, these are my
colleagues; Nicole, Frank, and Cole, and we are the prosecutors of this case. In our opening
statement, we had mentioned that we would call two witnesses to the stand to testify as the
defendants guilt. Each witness has testified how we explained and we have established that the
following are facts that are beyond reasonable doubt; 1) Miss Kabolo was 10 years of age when
she was taken from her school during a PFLS attack, 2) She identifies as a Kani, 3) She had seen
firsthand other children beaten or killed for trying to escape, At the camp, where she had become
a slave, she had learned that misbehaving or running would bring a beating or get her killed,
which is compulsory labor, 4) Since her arrival she had learned to operate an AK-47 and tactics
of war, whilst being a slave, as she was too young to go into combat, 5) Kabolo has met the
defendant at least twice and the first time he had pointed a gun at her for dropping his drink, 6)
At the age of 11 she was sent into combat, 7) she was usually sent with the younger children to
attack from the bushes nearest to the village, 8) She had been given amphetamine to dull her
senses during vicious attacks on villagers, 9) she was 12 when the UN soldier, Patrick Bateman,
had rescued her during a raid and transferred to a rehabilitation centre, which was for former
child soldiers, 10) Mr. Bateman was trained to deal with the threat that child soldiers pose to the
safety of the UN peacekeeping troops and the residents of Shansau. 11) He had witnessed several
armed children acting as soldiers in the camps and between 40 to 50 children fighting with

automatic weapons and machetes, 12) he is traumatized about having to fight against children
and firing back at them.

We would ask you to reject the defense theories of the case. First) The defense will attempt to get
you to think that the rebels were taking the children to the camps for their safety; a little force is
necessary if its for protection right? Wrong, the defendant had raised a gun towards a 10 year
old girl purely because she dropped his drink in front of him. Usually pointing a gun at someone
is an act of violence, not protection, regardless if there was intent behind it or not. The defenses
witness, Thomas Gaba, even stated that when he was taken to the rebel camp that Mr. Mabo had
told him, and the other children, that if they obeyed, they would be protected. Theyre children,
and children naturally dont follow rules. Yes, rules are there for children to learn about how to
act in different situations, but we as people learn from our mistakes, so the idea implies that if
they stepped out of line, or disobeyed, they would not get the protection that they were in need
of. The fact that both Miss Kabolo and Mr. Gaba both had seen firsthand that children that didnt
do what they were told were beaten or killed shows that it wasnt just about not getting
protection, not just reprimanding them, but these punishments were severe and lethal. Mr. Gaba
even gave out these types of punishments to children, as it was his duty to do so. The defense
might say that he lied about his age to be able to work, yet that raises another idea where it was
the adults that were doing this to these children. The people that they were told would protect
them. Second) They will try to have you consider the possibility that the defendant did not know
that the children in the camp were being trained as soldiers. That doesnt make sense as the
defendant was the commander-in-chief of the Patriotic Forces for the Liberation of Shansau, or

PFLS, which is the military wing of the Union of the Shansau Patriots, where the defendant was
one of the founders as well as the president. The defense may even say that the children, even the
Kani children, were there for protection, and basic necessities, yet, the camps were teeming with
armed children and were acting as soldiers or compound guards. Therefore the argument that
they were there for protection is just another excuse that the defendant had used because he did
not want to be held accountable for his actions. Once again, the defendant is the president of the
Union of the Shansau Patriots so why would they keep the children at a military training camp
for protection rather than the normal camps? A more accurate statement would be that they were
there for the rebels protection and to suit their needs. Third) The defense could argue that this
would only be relevant for the enlistment of children and say that they were only in the camps
not in actual combat. The PFLS main goal was to establish dominance through violence
against non-Lago people, especially against the Kani, and to Rid their land of the Kani
people. The defendant had also vowed not to stop the offensive at any cost until the
PFLS toppled the Troua government, this is where they had resorted to using children
as there was no longer a steady supply of adults that would fight for their cause. The
defendant should have realized and known about this when the PFLS was formed. They
were fighting a war werent they? Defense will try to bring up the defendants sad past
and say that the war only started because the Troua government, the Kanis, had kicked
the Lagos out of Shansau and they had killed his father with the sole reason being that
he was a Lago, making this an ethnic hatred issue. There are many times where it states
that the people had identified as one or the other. This shows that they would have had
to ask everyone what they identified as when they were running all the Lagos out of
Shansau. Many people lie for their own benefit, even Thomas Gaba even lied about his
age and since he knew that the PFLS was a group of rebel Lagos, its highly likely that he

lied about about his ethnicity. His father was a Lago yes, but his mother was a Kani, so
how did he make that decision? It was also stated that the PFLS was killing all the Kani
in sight; would that include his mother? There are many discrepancies in Mr. Gabas
testimony, answers that only raise more questions, making him an unreliable witness
along with the fact that he has a major bias towards the defendant as they were fighting
on the same side. Therefore the defendant saying that the Kani officer had killed his
father on the basis of he looked like a Lago is yet another excuse that the defendant is
using to distract you from the fact that the PFLS was promoting ethnic hatred against
the Kanis to further their cause. Its all just another sob story to cloud your mind and
put your focus on irrelevant things so you wont notice that they were using the exact
same method that the Kanis used when they were supposedly kicked out. Violence and
ethnic hatred, attacks on unsuspecting villagers does not sound very good for their
cause. If they were fighting against the people that kicked them out wouldnt they have
just went after the government, not innocent bystanders? Easily impressionable,
intimidated, and scared young children that dont understand what was going on, that
had lost their families, were trained to fight against innocent people. Miss Kabolo was
only 11 when she had joined the raids on villages. Fourth) the defense will attempt to
push the blame on the Troua government, because they were the ones that started the
war. Doesnt that sound familiar? They started it sounds a lot like a child that is trying
to get out of trouble, to distract from the fact that they had reacted badly to the
situation. As civilized people we have learned that that is not an excuse for doing
something wrong. We are taught that arguments need evidence and clear reasons to
back up our cause. The defense might put Charles Yitu into your crosshairs by saying
that he was the one in charge of the camps when the defendant was away, which he was

very frequently. That he is the one responsible for the use of children, but he is only the
second in command. The defendant should have been keeping up with the happenings
of his camp regardless of is attendance. Or does the defendant just have terrible control
over his subordinates that he just didnt know? This type of immature behavior doesnt
pardon any of the atrocities that he and his group had committed, it just furthers our
understanding of how out of control the entire rebel group is. The group did have this
man as their leader, and if he is this out of control then what does that say about the rest
of this revenge bound group? The defenses witnesses have plenty of reasons to lie about
the situation. Mr. Mabo, if proven innocent, will get off the hook for the atrocities that
he had committed and will be able to live guilt free knowing that you, as the judges for
this case, agree that what he has done to these innocent lives was reasonable. They are
not credible sources, there is plenty of bias and many issues about their testimonies that
just raise more questions than answers.
Our witnesses however are credible, they will gain nothing from lying, they are just here
to give justice for all the bystanders that got caught in this petty argument between the
two peoples. Even though the defense might say that Miss Kabolo is just a young child or
that Mr. Bateman has psychological trauma, PTSD, if you will, they have absolutely
nothing to earn from lying. Kabolo had lost her parents, even if they arent dead it would
be difficult to find them and she has already come to terms with the idea that they
wouldnt be proud of the things she has done. She was taken during school, some, if not
all of her friends were either killed or captured. She has been robbed of the innocence
that we would call a childhood, because she was forced to fight a war that wasnt hers to
fight in the first place. We know that Kabolo, along with other children, that were taken
to a rehabilitation centre for child soldiers where they had shown clear signs of width

drawl symptoms from the drug that they were given and that they had known as
Bubbles or its more commonly known as amphetamine. Let me give you a quick
rundown of the effects of amphetamine, it increases heart rate and blood pressure and
decreases appetite. It also can cause hallucinations and confusion, which the defense
will try to use as a way to discredit Miss Kabolo, but for them to use this fact as a
countermeasure then they would have to admit that she had been given this drug and
was using it continuously. What type of person would say that its okay for anyone to
give children drugs that have these harsh side effects. If Kabolo had these symptoms
then it would mean that she needed emergency medical attention, and clearly hasnt
gotten any. For these children to have such clear signs of withdrawal they must have
taken it for several weeks continuously before they were rescued. Mr. Bateman has
already fought for 22 years for the Canadian Armed Forces yet he now needs
psychological help because he had to fight against children, knowing that he had two of
his own at home in Canada. The defense will try to say that he is unreliable because he
now may have PTSD, yet if that is true then Mr. Bateman would have clear, vivid,
recollection of the events that had caused this stress. It also would take a lot of trauma to
make this man that has been doing this for over 20 years need psychological help now.