Endtown by Aaron Neathery for September 29, 2017

Of course. A pig as a prosecutor and a wolf as a defense attorney. And the jurors don’t look too convinced.

There is not one, NOT ONE, person in Endtown that has an ounce of bigotry in their body. Due to The End, and the need to be a close-knit community in the face of the threats presented by the Topsiders, every single Endtowner is a lover of humanity and their fellow mutant. They are ALL open-minded, liberal, and understanding. Heather is obviously a deviant and must be dealt with appropriately and immediately. Elect her President of Endtown right now! That’ll show her.

Hard to come up with a jury of your peers, right?The party balloons are a nice touch ; )

It’s all about the optics and creating a convincing illusion.

Laying it on with a trowel I see. Hamilton Burger showed more restraint.

Love the concerned look this single wolf in the middle of all the jurors has. “Maybe I shouldn’t have said no to that suicide mission from Prof. Mallard…”

Well, instead of a “hung” jury, this one looks like a “hanging” jury. Got to love the prosecutor’s opening statement. She has the jury “hating” the accused already. But, she has presented no evidence of her assertions, yet.

I’m not sensing her opening argument going down well with these guys.

The fighting breaks out in the jury box in three, two, one…….the looks on their faces!! Their minds says….. Not another trial! Didn’t we just have one earlier……something about Milk and Eggs??xD

I am not a lawyer.

She is trotting out a rhetorical tactic called ‘poisoning the well’. If the defendant is found not guilty it’s because the jurt members are bigots. In a real court the defense would probably raise an objection that would be sustained and the jury would receive instructions that would remedy the damage done.

The prosecutor’s motives in taking this unusual course remain a source of speculation for now.

And here I was hoping someone had invited her to dinner…

12 angry ex-men (and -women).

With the current anti-wolf sentiment in Endtown, I’m guessing the jury is predisposed against wolves and the lawyer’s arguments, and want to see Hoss go free because she killed a wolf. The wolf on the jury may realize that and wonder if they’ll be against him, too. They may not be happy with a pig prosecuting a wolf killer, either. But then they’ll be really confused and angry when they learn a wolf is defending her.

I find it troubling she was able to make those slanderous statements without censure by the judge.

the expression of that one wolf on the jury is hilarious when contrasted with that deadpan “is this bitch serious?” look everyone else is giving.

Wuff. 12 Angry Mammals.

Anyone else think it’s ironic that this lawyer is a pig?

I can’t tell what they are thinking, boredom, disgust with who? Just bored and don’t want to be there is my best guess.

Who’s the judge? Who. That’s what I asked Judge who? Who.What’s the judges name?Who. Dang it that’s all I want to know is his name?Who.The Judge?Who.Oh I give up.XD

May God forgive me… But I hear Miss Piggy’s voice when I read her speech balloons!

They wouldn´t buy this crap if they desperately needed manure.

A pig prosecutor? This is even more interesting – I bet that she was picked out with as much thought and ulterior motives behind it as the wolf lawyer. It seems to be a form of damage-control either way – if Heather is found guilty, then people will be able to say ‘Well, at least that wolf defending her proved a point’, and if she’s found not guilty then people will be able to say the same thing about the prosecutor.

It’s really unsettling though, seeing that this is basically turning into a proxy-battle over the bigger picture rather than being about truth and honesty at all.

Y’know, since the wolves are the ones who expressed avowed hatred for Heather Hoss, I’m not seeing much future in this line of argument. It all brings back memories of Philomena Flask and her trials.

Insulting and pissing off the Jury’s not a good idea but then it may be exactly what she wants…

No objection from the defense counsel when she calls the defendant “an avowed hater of wolves”?