Answer: As Johnny's defence lawyer, I believe he is not guilty of the murder of Bob, the Soc. There is no direct evidence linking Johnny to the crime scene, a possible motive for someone else to commit the murder, and the prosecution's key witness has a history of lying and inconsistencies in his story. Furthermore, Johnny is known to be a peaceful and non-violent person with no history of violent behaviour.
Explanation: As a lawyer in the court, my argument in defence of Johnny is based on the lack of concrete evidence that can directly link him to the murder of Bob. Eyewitness testimonies can be unreliable, and the prosecution has not presented any physical evidence such as DNA or fingerprints that can prove Johnny's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Additionally, the fact that someone else had a possible motive to commit the murder - supports the possibility that another individual may have carried out the crime.