Boston Legal：Closing结案陈词汇总帖06(2010-06-21 09:54:24)
标签： 娱乐
06汽车自燃烧死垂危病人
早上好，我的名字是Denise Bauer，我和Sara Holt是原告Jose Pitino的代表律师。原告的妻子Elena死于一场源自他们车库的火灾，造成这场火灾的原因是因为被告所生产并销售的皮卡无故自燃，而这辆皮卡当时并没有发动，事实上，那辆车整晚都没有被使用过。这个可怕的悲剧就发生在我们身边，当然，我们在这个法庭里所做的一切都不能挽救回Elena Pitino 的生命。如你们所知，官司的最终目的其实就是用金钱来试图弥补当事人受到的伤害。必须要肯定，问题之一，就是Elena到底在这场大火中受到多少伤害？我们也必须承认，Elena已经处于子宫癌晚期，事实上，她当天从医院返回家，就是要在家里等候死亡来临。你们可能会问自己“她到底承受了多大的痛苦?”这些你们都可以从Jose Pitino处了解到，而且你们会了解到她所拥有的是她生命当中的最后的几天，事实上，她只剩下六或七天时间可以和家人团聚了，可是她没能享受到这最后的时光，她根本就没有机会，再次坐在她的孙子旁，Jose，也再也没有机会可以抱着陪伴他度过了37年光阴的妻子，亲手抱着她?如果你们其中任何一位曾经有过挚爱不幸死于癌症或其他绝症，你们就能体会得到那短短地几天，会有多么的弥足珍贵。Jose和Elena Pitino本来可以有这个机会，但是他们却没有得到，你们虽然不能拯救Elena Pitino 的生命，但是也许你们可以拯救其他人的，因为这些诉讼，除了金钱赔偿外，也能够警醒世人。有谁最能够阻止这些悲剧的再度发生呢?当然，你们也许不禁会想说，这只是一场意外，但是事实上，这不仅仅是一场意外。这是由一家大型卡车制造商生产的十分畅销的一种皮卡，而它们居然会无故自燃，而且被告最近召回了数以百万计他们所生产的车辆，正是由于这些车辆出现了这个故障。你们看，这也许就是你们明天所要面临的情境。那么你们要怎么做才能使这些事情不再发生?你要让他们付出沉重的代价。当这场审判的结果最终变为一个具体的金额数字时，我恳求你们，作为裁定者，给我们一个数字，让它可以警醒所有汽车制造商们，对他们说，“务必使你们的车更加安全”为了你们自己，为了你们的子女，为了你们的孙辈，我恳求你们，作为一个人，作为这个社会的良心，为Elena Pitino所失去的一切，带来一份合理的判决，带给她的家庭，更重要的是，她的中学爱人。
Good morning. My name is Denise Bauer. I along with Sara Holt will be representing the plaintiff, Hose Pitino, who’s wife Elena died in a fire that started in their garage when their pickup truck, manufactured and sold by the defendant, suddenly burst into flames. The truck was not running at the time. In fact, it had not been driven all night. Let me begin by saying that a terrible human tragedy has occurred here. And of course nothing that happens in this courtroom will bring Elena Pitino back. Lawsuits you see are ultimately about money. Putting a dollar figure on suffering. Admittedly there is some question as to how much Elena even suffered in the fire. Also admittedly Elena was in the final stages of ovarian cancer. She had come home from the hospital, in fact that very day, basically to die. You may ask yourselves, “What damages did she really endure?” Well, you will hear from Hose Pitino and what you will hear is that she had a day, and another day coming after that, and another one after that. She had in fact six or seven days to be at home with her family. She didn’t get those days. She never got that last opportunity to sit with her grandchildren. Hose was never able his wife of thirty-seven years in his arms. Hold her in his arms and uhm… If any of you have spent the final days with a loved one dying of cancer or another disease you know those moments are the most precious. Hose and Elena Pitino had those days
coming. They didn’t get them. You can’t bring Elena Pitino back. But you are in a position to help save others. Because lawsuits, in addition to money, are about allocating burden. Who is best able to prevent this tragedy from happening again? Well you might be inclined to think, “This is just a freak accident.” But in fact this is a much bigger problem. This is a very popular sports truck made by a major manufacturer of sport trucks. And they’re catching fire! The defendant has recently recalled almost a million of their vehicles because of this malfunction. So you see? This is potentially your problem. How do you motivate a corporate conglomerate to fix a defect? You make it too expensive for them not to. At the conclusion of this trial, when it finally comes down to a dollar amount I’ll be asking you to be legislators and come back with a number that says to the defendant and all car manufacturers, “Make your vehicles safe.” For your sake. For your daughters. For your grandsons. And I’ll ask you to be human beings. The conscience of a passionate society and return with a verdict that somehow reflects everything that was taken from Elena Pitino, her family and most of all her high school sweetheart.
第二篇：结案陈词汇总帖07
Boston Legal：Closing结案陈词汇总帖07(2010-06-21 09:57:51)
07伊拉克大兵意外死亡案，诉美国国防部
律师Chris Randolf: 在战争中，任何战争，都避免不了有伤亡。对于一个烈士的家属来说，因此而控诉军队，不仅是十分可笑的，而且是一种侮辱。首先，它破坏了为国捐躯的士兵的荣誉感，更有甚者，这是对爱国主义和军队本身的攻击。他应征入伍，他受过战斗训练，他清楚战争的风险，这场官司仅仅是试图公然宣扬反战情绪，它不分是非，它没有根据，这是对每一个为了保卫祖国而开赴前线，特别是对那些因此牺牲的士兵和退伍军人的公然侮辱。In war, any war, there are casualties. For the family of a victim to sue the army for such a casualty is not only patently ridiculous it’s an insult. First it offends the memory of the soldier who gave his life to defend his country. Worst, it’s an attack on patriotism and the US Army itself. He enlisted. He was trained in combat. He assumed the risks of combat. This lawsuit merely represents a flamboyant attempt to showcase anti-war sentiment. It is wrong, it is baseless and it’s an affront to every soldier, to every veteran who has put himself on the line to defend the United States of America. Especially, primarily the ones who have given their lives to do so.
Alan Shore: 首先，这不是反战情绪。二等兵Elliot是支持战争的，而我个人，我曾反对它，然后支持它，然后又反对它，但是这只是我个人行为而已，我是墙头草。但是无论支不支持这场战斗，根据你的领带，让我们假设支持好了，都不能因此而默许军方，向他们的士兵们撒谎。二等兵Elliot被告知他只需服一年兵役，他被告知他不会参加战斗。好吧，尽管由于不可预期的因素，他参与了战斗，没有关系，但是他在战争中得不到有效的支援，他被派往从事一项他没有接受过培训的工作，他得不到最基本的补给，而他尽了自己的义务后，他们不让他离开，他并不知道要承担这种风险，过度延长役期，得不到良好的装备，没有接受过训练，这些都超出了他的预期，而他现在牺牲了，除了他的姐姐，没有人在意。我们常说要向我们的士兵表示敬意，难道这就是对我们牺牲的士兵表示敬意的方式?我们的孩子在那里牺牲了，而他们的祖国，他们的同胞，还有媒体，我们就像什么都没有发生过一样，我们可以花上一个月的功夫来讨论谢维讼案(关于是否该让一个植物人安乐死的案子)，可是我们却不敢放出士兵的遗体的画面?最多人收看的有线电视台可以每晚花上一个小时时间来关注一个阿鲁巴岛上失踪女童，但是我们却从来不关心像二等兵Elliot这样的孩子在战争中被杀害…
First. This is hardly about anti-war sentiments. Private Elliot was for the war. Personally I was against it, then I was for it then I was against it again, but that’s just me, I’m a flip flopper. But whether one is for or against the occupation and let’s assume judging from your tie one is, that does not exempt the military from a duty to be honest with its soldiers. Private Elliot was told he’d serve a year. He was told he wouldn’t see combat! Okay! Unexpected stuff happens he did see combat. Fine! But, he was sent into combat with insufficient backup, he was sent in to perform duties for which he was never ever trained! He wasn’t given the most basic of equipment. And then after his tour of duty was finally up they wouldn’t let him leave. He never assumed those risks by enlisting. Over extended, under equipped, non-trained. He never signed up for that. And now he’s dead. An aside from his sister, nobody seems to care. We talk about honoring the troops. How about we honor them by giving a damn when they’re killed! Our kids are dying over there! In this country, the people, the media, we all just chug along like nothing is wrong. We’ll spend a month obsessing about Terri Shivo. But dare we show the body of a fallen soldier? The most watched cable news station will spend an hour a night on a missing girl in Aruba, but God forbid
we pay any attention when kids like Private Elliot, killed in action…
我没离题。我们有2,000 幼苗在那里的战火中倒下，而我们甚至都不知道，不一定知道，也许我们根本就不想知道我们的孩子牺牲了，所以我们应该庆幸这场战争并没有被搬到荧幕上，我们看不到士兵们死在他们队友怀里的画面，在巴格达的街头被炸飞，这样的事情有上千起，而所有的美国民众却在关心，布拉德彼特和安吉丽娜茱丽是否结婚了。至少在越南战争的时候，我们都会关心，都会感到愤怒。
I’m not off the point. We’ve had two thousand American trees fall in that forest over there and we don’t even know it. Not really. But, maybe we don’t wanna know about our children dying. So lucky for us this war isn’t really being televised. We’re not seeing images of soldiers dying in the arms of their comrades, being blown apart on the streets of Bagdad. But they are! By the thousands! And all the American public wants to concern itself with is whether Brad and Angelina really are a couple.
法官插话：这到底和二等兵Elliot的死有什么关系?What does this have to do with the death of Private Elliot?
二等兵Elliot的死，部分是由于我们民众和政府的漠视，我们没有为这场战争制定任何策略，我们也没有撤军时间表，某些士兵可能要在那里呆上二十几年，他们的父母必须要给他们送去防弹衣，因为军队不提供，然后他们被杀害了!而我们，我们的国家就像旁观者，任由其为之，我们根本就不在意。当然，除了她。她现在就在这个法庭里面，缅怀着一位死去的士兵。这只是个开始。
Private Elliot is dead in part because we have a people and a government in denial. We currently have no strategy to fight this war. We have no timetable for getting out. Some of these troops could be extended twenty plus years! Their mothers and fathers have to spring for body armor because the army doesn’t. And they’re getting killed! And we as a nation in denial are letting them. We simply don’t seem to care. Well she does. She’s in this courtroom honoring one dead soldier. That’s a start.
法官Clark Brown:战争是一场灾难，美国在错误的预期下发起了它。政府不断地被高级军事顾问告知，那儿需要更多的部队，这些顾问被忽视了，甚至有些被解雇了，因此就形成了我们现在的局面。就像另一场越南战争的开端，除了，像Shore先生所指出的，并没有引起很大的关注。无论如何，我们都处于战争之中，而其中一样让军队在战时能够正常运作的就是它所拥有的权威，令行禁止，这也就是国会赋予军队诉讼豁免权的原因。Elliot小姐，我为你和你的弟弟感到深切的同情，但是…我站在政府这一边，此案撤销。This war is a disaster. It has been sold to America under false premise. The government has been repeatedly told by its most senior military advisors that it needs far more troops. The advisors have been ignored or, in some cases, even fired. And now we have what very much looks like the beginning of another Vietnam. Except as Mr Shore points out, without the necessary outrage. That said, like it or not, we are at war. And the one thing that keeps the military functioning in war is its hierarchy. Orders are given, orders followed. That’s why Congress has granted the military immunity in lawsuits like this. Ms Elliot, I have the deepest sympathy for you and for your brother. However I rule in favor of the government. The motion to dismiss is granted.