User:Deanavg/sandbox

Cicero’s case was divided into three parts. The first was explaining exactly the charge brought by Ericius. He explained how a rustic son of a farmer, who lives off of the pleasures of his own land, would not have gained anything from committing patricide because he would have inherited his father's land anyway. The second was the boldness and greed of two the accusers, Magnus and Capito. Cicero tells the jury that they are the more likely perpetrators for murder because they are both greedy for conspiring together against a fellow kinsman, and Magnus' boldness for being unashamed to appear in court to support the false charges.The third explained that Chrysogonus had immense political power and the accusation was successfully made due to that power. Even though Chrysogonus may not have been what Cicero said he was, but through rhetoric, Cicero successfully made him appear to be a foreign freed man who was clever enough to take advantage of the aftermath of the civil war, and prosper. It showed what kind of a person he was and that something like murder was not beneath him.