ackie
previously jwehl // dogs & cats & squirrels oh my!
Yesterday, I went on a mystery caper adventure.
At the scene of the crime, formerly referred to as the driveway, I found one (1) seemingly uninjured, dead chicken and one (1) previously white, currently a shade of red *pause for effect* blood red, chicken. I concluded (perhaps too hastily!) that the bloody chicken was indeed the murderer. What's more, there was footage of the incident on a nearby security camera. The mystery seemed solved.
A representative of the accused asked a simple question: could it have been self defense? Back to the video we went, quickly determining that the deceased was indeed the instigator of this fight. Killing may seem to be an unreasonable escalation, but that is for the jury to determine; the evidence clearly showed the accused attempting to flee the situation on two separate occasions, before, if you'll forgive me for being crass, kicking the ever-loving *** out of the deceased. Of course, by happenstance or conspiracy I can't say; the final resting place of the deceased was obscured on the camera footage.
Suddenly! upon additional analysis, it was determined that one (1) peacock was at the crime scene around the time of death as well! Could the accused not have dealt the final blow at all? Slowing down and heavily scrutinizing the video (enhance! enhance!), gone almost unnoticed and over in the blink of an eye - a red tailed hawk was seen flying in from the upper left, landing directly where the deceased was later discovered!
Said the prosecution: "Are you expecting me to believe, after seeing the accused attacking the deceased ON VIDEO, that a third party, WITH NO MOTIVE, just swooped in, dealt a death blow, and left, with absolutely nothing to gain from this altercation?"
Innocent or guilty, it is up for you to decide.
At the scene of the crime, formerly referred to as the driveway, I found one (1) seemingly uninjured, dead chicken and one (1) previously white, currently a shade of red *pause for effect* blood red, chicken. I concluded (perhaps too hastily!) that the bloody chicken was indeed the murderer. What's more, there was footage of the incident on a nearby security camera. The mystery seemed solved.
A representative of the accused asked a simple question: could it have been self defense? Back to the video we went, quickly determining that the deceased was indeed the instigator of this fight. Killing may seem to be an unreasonable escalation, but that is for the jury to determine; the evidence clearly showed the accused attempting to flee the situation on two separate occasions, before, if you'll forgive me for being crass, kicking the ever-loving *** out of the deceased. Of course, by happenstance or conspiracy I can't say; the final resting place of the deceased was obscured on the camera footage.
Suddenly! upon additional analysis, it was determined that one (1) peacock was at the crime scene around the time of death as well! Could the accused not have dealt the final blow at all? Slowing down and heavily scrutinizing the video (enhance! enhance!), gone almost unnoticed and over in the blink of an eye - a red tailed hawk was seen flying in from the upper left, landing directly where the deceased was later discovered!
Said the prosecution: "Are you expecting me to believe, after seeing the accused attacking the deceased ON VIDEO, that a third party, WITH NO MOTIVE, just swooped in, dealt a death blow, and left, with absolutely nothing to gain from this altercation?"
Innocent or guilty, it is up for you to decide.
