An Analysis of the Oral During Brian Friels Play Freedom of the City

Firstly the judge: Judges have tremendous power in court-cases, as we expect they have the power to decide the outcome of these cases, and that they should haven't no opinion on the topic and should just look at the evidence presented to make a judgment. Although we all think this should happen as we see only after minutes of talking with a policeman the judge as already called the trio terrorist. Many times when the judge speaks he tries to push his point of view onto the jury and others that attended inside the courtroom, about how he can't accept that the trio just happened to walk into the guildhall and that the only way they could have gotten in there was if they planned it.

When the judge summaries his report he talks about how he doesn't think that the soldiers would have opened fire first, again we see that he based this entire decision on his opinion and doesn't take in the evidence that no guns were found on or near the trio, and that when the trio came out of the guildhall they had their hands on their head which makes it a bit hard to fire a gun, another major piece of evidence that was pushed aside my the judge was the fact that no police officers would killed or injured which seems a bit weird when apparently the trio were the ones that came out shooting.

Get quality help now

KarrieWrites

Verified writer

Proficient in: City

5 (339)

“ KarrieWrites did such a phenomenal job on this assignment! He completed it prior to its deadline and was thorough and informative. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Now the Priest:A priest is another character that we presume that they would tell the truth and not mislead people, but as we see this priest looks at the bigger picture, which might help the protesters to get what they wanted it still doesn't make it right.

The Priest leads the trio out to be martyers, "dying for what they believed in", which we and him know is wrong and that they were just in the wrong place and wrong time.

Soldiers and the Brigadier: The soldiers and the brigader claim that when the trio came out of the guildhall they were firing bullets at them and had to take defensive action and fire back to stop them, but we all know that when they came out they had their hands on their heads. One accidental obstruction of evidence was when the soldiers dragged the trio from the scene, without knowing it they were spreading gun residue although the trio making it look like they had been firing weapons.

The media:Without the media outside the guildhall and hearing about people in the guildhall then this situation would have gone very differently, the press released news about how people had broken into the guildhall, but they didn't have all the facts so they made some up saying that there was 40 terrorist inside the guildhall. By releasing this information they made the public believe them and even the police and the army. If they hadn't done this then there wouldn't have been so many policeman and army soldiers outside waiting for the trio to come out and probably wouldn't have killed anyone. To conclude, as we see the evidence that lead to the deaths of Lily, Skinner and Michael, in some cases had been manipulated and twisted by those who we think should be seeking the truth over everything. If the evidence and the characters had done what they were meant to then we would have seen a very different outcome.