He was known as one of the best legal advocates at the time in Athens. He gave over 200 speeches in court. At this time he found himself defending a husband who murdered his wife’s lover (PS25). The problem was that there was only one side of the story obviously because the prosecution was 6 feet under. This is interesting because there are many cases like this today in the present with the most recently the Trayvon Martin case, but this case is so relevant because at this time in Athens women didn’t have any right s other than when their husband would die they would have the right to his property, but ultimately that is it. This case is a little different though. In the court room he does admit to killing the man that slept with his wife, but he said the city was the actual person killing him. He then goes on by saying he had to do it because then people will hear it around the city and they will think twice about committing such a crime again their neighbor’s wife. He end the speech by saying that what he did was actally the law to follow. He is putting the blame on city asking why he might lose his property, life and everything else he has because of the law the city has in place. This is important because going on into history when leaders like Julius Caesar has a wife and a lover they can g back into time and see that if he is killed they could make the excuse that is was the city that made him do it. Obviously Caesar went out a little different way, but looking back was he guilty or not
He was known as one of the best legal advocates at the time in Athens. He gave over 200 speeches in court. At this time he found himself defending a husband who murdered his wife’s lover (PS25). The problem was that there was only one side of the story obviously because the prosecution was 6 feet under. This is interesting because there are many cases like this today in the present with the most recently the Trayvon Martin case, but this case is so relevant because at this time in Athens women didn’t have any right s other than when their husband would die they would have the right to his property, but ultimately that is it. This case is a little different though. In the court room he does admit to killing the man that slept with his wife, but he said the city was the actual person killing him. He then goes on by saying he had to do it because then people will hear it around the city and they will think twice about committing such a crime again their neighbor’s wife. He end the speech by saying that what he did was actally the law to follow. He is putting the blame on city asking why he might lose his property, life and everything else he has because of the law the city has in place. This is important because going on into history when leaders like Julius Caesar has a wife and a lover they can g back into time and see that if he is killed they could make the excuse that is was the city that made him do it. Obviously Caesar went out a little different way, but looking back was he guilty or not