Michael Delgado, Eli Agutter, Thomas Micklos, Dylan Upshaw, and Emilie

Your honor, the prosecution has tried to prove today that Arthur Mabo is guilty of war crime,

specifically conscripting and enlisting children under the age of fifteen into armed groups,

enlisting children into armed groups,and using children to actively participate in armed conflict.

The Victim’s lawyers have tried to prove that Mabo is responsible for the death and suffering of

Alia Rutu’s son, Emmanuel Rutu. Before this trial comes to an end we would like to express our

deepest condolences for the death of Mrs. Rutu’s son Emmanuel. However, there is not enough

evidence to prove that Mabo is guilty of conscripting children under fifteen into an armed group,

enlisting children into armed groups, using children to participate actively in armed conflict and

he is definitely not responsible for the death and suffering of Alia Rutu’s son. The command

responsibility law states that a commander is responsible for his subordinates actions but it does

not mention anything about the commander being responsible for what happens to the

subordinates. This would include injury and even loss of life. It also states that a commander is

only responsible if he ordered, knew or didn't try to prevent the crimes committed by his
subordinates, however for the crimes Mabo is accused of the attempted prevention does not

apply There is nothing that states that Mabo ordered his subordinates to commit these crimes. He

was also gone for almost the entire war at planning meetings so he couldn't have reasonably

known what was happening. We will again state the possibility that Mabo’s second in command,

Charles Yitu, disobeyed Mabo and took it upon himself to kidnap children and recruit them as

child soldiers. This all without telling Mabo about what he was attempting to do. The

prosecution has also tried to use Patrick Bateman to help their cause here today. He has stated

that he witnessed the use of child soldiers while in a PFLS camp who were no older than the age

of seven. Again we ask, how is he supposed to truly be aware of their age? He never spoke to

any of the children he saw directly. The prosecution had anna kabolo tell her story and about

how Mabo pointed a gun at her. Think about it if you had gone through what Mabo has gone

through and you heard a glass break you would react the way he did. The other soldier whispered

to him and could have told him that it was only a glass. He then lowered his gun. If he wanted to

hurt her, he would of. Anna Kabolo was used to prove that Arthur Mabo is truly guilty of having
conscripted children into his rebel force. However, can Anna actually identify Mabo? She was

also extremely drugged and under the influence at the time of being within the camps which

could have a major effect on how she thinks and what she sees. It very easily could’ve been

someone else but she assumed it was him due to everyone mentioning commander Mabo. Arthur

Mabo is not guilty folks, Arthur Mabo is simply a man who lost his livelihood and family to the

Kani and Troua government. There is not enough evidence that was presented here today to

prove completely that Mr. Mabo is actually guilty of all the crimes he’s being accused of.