The Tweeter’s Court: The People’s Ankle Vs. Zaza Pachulia

- The following is a re-imagining of the past 24hrs on Twitter as though it were being conducted in a court room.

We are now joining "The People’s Ankle vs. Zaza Pachulia" already in session. The indictment has already occurred, and the evidence has been reviewed by the defense and the prosecution. Now the "NBA Twitter Attorneys at Law" are presenting their arguments. First to present their case is the prosecution.

The "People’s Ankle" council is suggesting that the actions taken by Zaza Pachulia were outside the confines of ethical, and legal behavior. They are asserting that there was intent to harm San Antonio’s Kawhi Leonard upon his recovery from a corner three jump shot attempt. They are supporting their claim (upon an extensive living room based review of the footage) that Zaza took an extra step in order to enter the landing space to unsafely and maliciously impact the landing of the already injured Mr. Leonard.

-- Side Note: After review of the evidence that has been entered in this particular litigation it has been noted that the most applicable precedent for this particular case has been widely omitted by the council representing "The People’s Ankle". This precedent can be found in the Playoff case files under, Bowen, Bruce. Though it has not been confirmed, a suggested motive for neglecting the Bowen case files for use in supporting arguments may be due to Mr. Bowen’s prior employment and professional capacity being supported and provided by the Coach and Organization, and most importantly, the fan base that Mr. Leonard just so happens to be employed by.--

The two most impactful witness testimonies put on the stand had startlingly contrasting opinions on the incident involving Leonard and Pachulia. Of the most damning to the prosecution is the testimony of Mr. Leonard himself. On the night of the game Mr. Leonard said plainly when asked about Zaza’s actions that, "It wasn’t dirty", and left little to no room for interpretation. A semblance of damage control in favor of the prosecution occurred this afternoon when the (deservedly) highly respected San Antonio Spur’s coach Mr. Popovich, flat-out called the closeout "Unnatural" and then emphatically continued to imply that intent was displayed by Mr. Pachulia.

In their closing statement the prosecution aggressively described Pachulia as a "dirty player" committing a "dirty play" out of desperation. They pressed that his actions were motivated by his team (The Golden State Warriors) being down by 20+ and felt a need to remove the most impactful player from the floor by way of injury for personal gain. The jury was clearly moved. You could see remorseful gazes, and maybe even a tear or two as they showed images of the kind hearted Kawhi Leonard grasping at his battered ankle. The prosecution rested knowing full well it had tugged on the heartstrings of the jury all while painting a clear picture of malfeasance on the part of Pachulia.

The Council representing the defendant Zaza Pachulia used a much more unconventional litigating strategy. They opened and closed their case in one shot, starting with a video of Zaza Pachulia "flopping" onto the court and making injury causing contact with his own (highly valued) teammate, Kevin Durant. After the video had ended the defense looked to the jury and said, "This fucking guy is clumsy." Pointing at Mr. Pachulia. "He does an incredibly atrocious job controlling his body. It’s absolutely infuriating for us too." Turning toward the prosecution they continued, "We truly feel bad for Kawhi Leonard, and hope he comes back healthy and soon." Turning back once more to the jury they concluded, "You know and I know the prosecution couldn’t prove intent if they wanted to. So why don’t we just wrap this shit up and get out of here?"

The jury’s reaction to the arrogance and disregard for the dramatic presentation by the prosecution was that of discomfort, a little anger, and a realization that, though emotionally effective, the prosecution really had no case (even if they didn’t want to admit it).

Now that both sides have rested, the jury retires to deliberate in an attempt to reach a fair and just verdict. How long will they take? My guess is forever, or until they forget about it.