Sample "Slip or Trip? Argument
6th Period, IB Survey Literature
 

“Margaret? … Are you home? … Margaret, where are you? … Oh, hi, honey…wait…What are you doing with that frying pan?! …Stop! Please! Ahhh!!!” This a reenactment of what undoubtedly happened the fateful night when we believe Charles was murdered by his wife! All the evidence in “Slip or Trip?” points to murder, and who better to do it than his wife? His wife who Charles had had an argument with earlier that night. His wife who had plenty of time, ten minutes, to commit this horrible crime. His wife who left loads of forensically, hard evidence that point to one and only one conclusion: Margaret murdered her husband Charles.
 
To begin, we know that Margaret had both a motive and opportunity to harm Charles. Earlier that day, Margaret and Charles had a heated confrontation that resulted in Margaret storming out of the house. This establishes that Margaret had a motive to hurt Charles. After Margaret left the house, she went to the country club and visited with some friends who she then invited home with her when she left at 1 a.m. She arrived at home ten minutes before her guests. This shows that Margaret had ample opportunity to commit a heinous crime, like killing her husband (bump, bump, buuuuummmmm!). We believe the fuzz should take a closer look at Margaret and consider her a suspect in this “accident.”
 
Aside from motive and opportunity, there is plenty of evidence to prove that Charles’ “accident” wasn’t anything of the kind. Take, for instance, the position of Charles’ dead body. Charles was found lying on his back with his feet on the stairs. Yet, Margaret claimed that Charles had fallen “while coming down for another drink.” When you fall while coming down the stairs, your head should end up on the stairs or your body should land on its front. Margaret’s little story clearly doesn’t match the facts. How suspicious! Now we have even more reason to consider Margaret as a prime suspect in this case.
 
In addition to the evidence just presented, the glass Charles was allegedly carrying downstairs is still in his hand and unbroken. If you were to fall down the stairs, you would drop what you’re carrying to try to stop your fall. That tiny, little glass PROVES that Charles couldn’t have fallen the way Margaret said. Once again, Margaret seems to be lying through her teeth, and why would she lie if this was an “innocent accident?” The only explanation for her lying is that she is a malicious killer.
 
The holes in Margaret’s story don’t stop there. Two more clues call attention to her guilt. The decorations on the stairway wall are untouched, and Charles's right hand isn't holding anything. When you fall, you reach for whatever's closest to you to stop your fall. In this case, Charles would have reached for the wall since his right hand is free. Yet miraculously enough, nothing on the wall has moved! This is more evidence to prove Charles's death was no accident. It was murder!
 
Last but not least, there is the matter of how Margaret managed to do away with her husband. In the coroner’s report, it was found that Charles died of a "wound to the head." Furthermore, when Charles was found at 1 a.m., a frying pan was cooking on the stove. These two facts together suggest Margaret’s nefarious method. We know that a frying pan is certainly sturdy enough to inflict a head wound, and Margaret certainly had access to it. While we'd need further tests to validate this, we conclude that the frying pan is only on that stove for Margaret to destroy evidence of her crime.
 
In summary, Margaret isn’t the mourning widow of a man who had a tragic, drunken accident. She is an insidious murderess. She deserves to fry for her sins.