Despite all the disadvantages the defendant had there are a few things that she did have going for her. The judge did appoint an able attorney. That is to say instead of appointing an attorney that would undoubtedly lose the case, the judge was nice enough to appoint a legal counsel that could hold there own. Also, Jameson, the attorney who presented the case to the jury, was personally known to the people of the jury, whereas the prosecutor was not. The text states that "Jameson was a well known and respected local figure." Also, the text points out that the prosecutor was relatively inexperienced.
The case took place right before the Civil War. Slavery was a huge issue at that time. So, the whole town was paying close attention to the trial and was looking for blood. The judge being aware of this could be said to have been somewhat impartial. That is to say that he could be leaning to the side of the prosecution.
The defense tried to establish that there was no murder but an act of self defense. The witnesses called were difficult to interrogate because the prosecution and the judge were making it very difficult to go anywhere. The women called to the stand could not be interrogated about the instance or knowledge of the rape of Celia by her owner. This was an Old South courtesy extended to women. The defense also tried to establish that the defendant could not have acted alone because the body had been found burned of its flesh, and how could Celia sick and pregnant move the body alone, place it in a fireplace, and then proceed to move the remainder out of her quarters. Again the prosecution would object and the defense could no longer attack this line of thought. He also tried to get the jury to find that the defendant should be charged with murder in the second degree which would give a sentence of life in prison instead of the sentence of death by hanging. The defense tried to explain to the jury that by law Celia, even though she was a slave, could protect her honor by using deadly force.
