John Steinbeck has presented his case. I believe that his client, George Milton, is innocent. George should be found innocent because of his clear emotional attachment to the victim, his heartfelt mercy for his late friend, and the lack of a plausible motive. He was good friends with this man. That fact is unopposed, why would he kill his dear friend unless he truly thought that something worse would happen if he didn't. I see no reason to convict him for this murder.
The defense counsel has stated that his client was committing euthanasia. Although many frown upon this act, it is not yet illegal. We can not convict this man of something that is not written as an illegal act. If a man is to shoot a horse with a broken leg, do we persecute him for killing a healthy animal, or if a wolf is attacking a sheep, and the farmer kills the sheep so that he may avoid the suffering, is the a malicious act. The defendant had no motive to kill his friend. Can we just assume that there was some argument we did not know about, or should we hope that the defendant had some gain? No! Until the district attorney can give us some evidence of a hateful act or even a background of violence in this man, we must not convict him. We were not presented any reason for George to kill his friend, Lennie, other then the mercy he had in his heart, knowing that his helpless, handicapped, naive friend was being hunted by a society that didn't understand him. .
The victim in this case, Lennie Small, is a known murderer. He has been accused, without denial of killing, Curley's wife. This woman's husband, Curley, was heard threatening Lennie, vowing vengeance on his wife's murderer. When George heard that something was coming, that he had no way of stopping, he had only one choice. He had only one outlet, he had to protect his friend, and the only way he could in this circumstance, was to kill him. Yes, a bullet to the head is very painful, and very violent.
