Without Excuse

Guilty with forgiveness. That is how God sees our lives. A courtroom drama.
God took the guilt away through His Son, Jesus, and offered forgiveness in return. Some see acts of cheating as just a little bit guilty, others know they are guilty but have made restitution.

Cast: 8+

• (can be male or female, any age)
• Judge
• Bailiff
• Prosecutor
• Defender
• Johnson
• Andrychuk
• Jessop
• Offstage voice of God
• crowd as available

Bible Reference: John 3:16

Set:

• Courtroom scene, can be as elaborate or simple as desired

Sound: wireless mics if available

Song: none

Lighting: standard

SFX: none

Props: gavel & Bible

Costumes:

• Judge, Bailiff in official attire
• Prosecutor, Defender and Johnson in business clothing
• Andrychuk and Jessop in work clothes

Special Instructions: none

Time: 20

Courtroom Drama

Scene: All except Judge are on stage. Jessop is in the audience.

Bailiff: All rise, Supreme Court is now in session. Judge Peters presiding.

(All stand while the judge walks in and sits down.)

Bailiff: You may be seated.

Judge: Good morning all, a busy schedule I see. Just prior to getting down to business, however, a housekeeping comment relative to yesterday’s proceedings. Those who were in attendance in my court yesterday may recall a heated discussion regarding admissibility of ignorance as a basis for innocence. To avoid confusion and delay of the court’s time, I believe it would be prudent to restate the facts of law. In the eyes of the law, the indisputable fact is that ignorance shall in no situation be considered as a defense. While we may have great empathy for those who have failed to acquaint themselves with points of law, all who appear before this court shall be judged solely on the circumstances surrounding the case alone. It shall be assumed that all citizens have taken it upon themselves to apprise themselves of the law of the land.

(Defender rises, signals to the judge.)

Defender: Your Honour, may it please the court, a question of clarification, if I may.

Judge: Counsellor, your question, although I do insist that you keep it brief.

Defender: Thank you, Your Honour. We certainly cannot argue that under normal circumstances a citizen shall, as Your Honour has touched upon, take it upon his or herself to become aware of the law. However, as Your Honour is eminently aware, circumstances are not always "normal." One could point to an immigrant coming to this land without the benefit of language or experience in matters of this jurisdiction. Surely Your Honour would not hold such a person to be guilty of an error in law when they had no preparedness to know the law?

Judge: Counsellor, let us examine this hypothetical client for whom you have such overwhelming compassion. One would assume that this person has, one way or another, managed to function within the framework of this society since arriving here: obtaining employment, managing basic commerce as to the buying and selling of goods and services. This being the case, how can this court hold that this same person somehow lacked the skills to ascertain right from wrong? Judgment, counsellor: your hypothetical client will stand guilty as charged if they have not sought out, in a prudent manner, clarification on points of law. Does this then answer your questions, counsellor?

Defender: If I may, Your Honour, a further supplementary question?

Judge: Very well, counsellor. The final question.

Defender: What, Your Honour, if the accused were a child? What then?

Judge: Although I admit to the fact that sometimes it distresses me, the decision cannot change. Guilty as charged, regardless of age.

Defender: Your Honour!

Judge: Counsellor, listen to me very carefully! It is not my duty, no, not even my privilege, to make the laws, merely to judge based on laws that have been set in place by higher authority.

Defender: Unfair!

Judge: Counsellor, you appear to have forgotten a basic fact of law. While justice demands that punishment fit the crime, it is incontestable that where there is a crime there too shall be punishment for that crime. For every crime, there must be retribution. To do otherwise is to foster lawlessness! While we may all squirm in certain circumstances, remember again: where a law is broken, retribution shall emerge.

Defender: Then how is an ignorant one to know, to understand, to be aware of the law?

Judge: That, sir, is the duty of those in the society in which that person exists, to ensure that all will be cognizant of the law.

Defender: And who in society is charged with this heavy responsibility, Your Honour?

Judge: You, sir. And I. Now, Bailiff, first case if you please.

(Bailiff stands, Defender is seated.)

Bailiff: The case of the state versus Johnson, Your Honour.

(Pam Johnson comes to the front and is seated in the witness stand. The Bailiff administers the oath.)

Bailiff: State your name, please.

Johnson: Pamela Jane Johnson.

Bailiff: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Johnson (confidently): I do.

Bailiff: You may be seated.

Judge: And what are the charges, Ms. Prosecutor?

Prosecutor: Your Honour, Ms. Johnson is accused of three counts of income tax evasion, failure to report on earnings.

Judge: And how does your client plead, Counsellor?

Defender: Not guilty, Your Honour. If I may point out certain facts, Your Honour, I think matters can be very quickly resolved.

Judge: Very well, proceed, Counsellor.

Defender: Ms. Johnson, will you please state for the record your civic, community, and church affiliations.

Johnson: I am very proud of my record. I was chosen “Woman Entrepreneur” last year, am a special advisor to the Mayor on matters of civic law, chairperson of the United Appeal, and sit on the board of my local church.

Prosecutor: I object, Your Honour! What relevance does the accused’s public standing have relative to the charges at hand?

Judge: I am pleased you asked that question, Ms. Prosecutor, I was about to do so. Perhaps, Counsellor, you would favour both of us with an answer.

Defender: Well, obviously the impeccable standing and credentials of my client speak for the fact that she is certainly innocent of these charges.

Judge: You lost me, Counsellor. What has the reputation of your client got to do with the guilt or innocence in this case? Listen, while perhaps irregular, the Court chooses to ask a direct question of the defendant. Ms. Johnson, are you guilty of the charges as read against you?

Johnson: Well, Your Hon . . .

Defender: Your Honour! I object!

Judge: You do? On what grounds do you object? And regardless, your objections are overruled. Now then, Ms. Johnson, did you, or did you not fail to report income as prescribed by the law of this country?

Johnson (uncomfortable): Well, actually, yes, Your Honour. I didn’t quite report all income.

Judge: Then you are guilty as charged, are you not?

Defender: I object, Your Honour! Ms. Johnson cannot be treated as an ordinary criminal.

Judge: Ms. Johnson, your reputation does not create an excuse, only a responsibility. In the meantime, I find you guilty as charged. Bailiff, please hold Ms. Johnson over for this afternoon when I shall impose sentencing.

Bailiff leads Johnson offstage, as she protests

Want to see how the story unfolds? DramaShare members get this complete script— and access to our entire library—free! Not a member? You can still grab this individual script and bring it to life.