Newman should have been tried on "Seinfeld" finale

My opponent attempts to provide a crime that Newman committed while trying to show the gang's innocence. However, there have been many crimes that the gang committed. The gang should have been tried for their crime. For example, when Jerry was in need of a loaf of bread to give to George, so he could replace it, he STEALS it from an old lady off the street, in the episode, "The Rye". Also, it can be shown that the gang committed yet another crime when they willfully parked in a handicap spot, at the mall, so it would be easier for them. Because of their lack of respect for the law, a handicapped woman was forced to park in a faraway spot. While on a hill, the woman's wheelchair lost its battery, and the woman fell down the hill on her wheelchair. Had the gang had a little more respect for the law, this woman would have not had to go up the hill, and she wouldn't have crashed, and ultimately, she wouldn't have gone to the hospital. The previous incident can be shown in, "The Handicap Spot". Also, in "The Implant", Jerry sent Elaine into the sauna Sidra Holland was in, to see if her breasts were real. After "tripping", Elaine touched Sidra's breast, and came to the conclusion that not only were Sidra's breasts real, but, "spectacular". Finally, while the gang was in Latham, Massachusetts, they see an overweight man get robbed, and held up at gunpoint. Yet, instead of doing anything to help that man, like calling the police, they took out a video camera, and decided to make fun of the man. This shows blatant dis-regard for the law. My opponent tries to show that the gang does not have a track record of poor behavior, which I have successfully refuted. I provide many instances in which the gang shows dis-respect for the law, while my opponent can only provide one example where Newman broke the law. If Newman was to be put up for trial, then he must be charged with a crime. However, my opponent has not yet provided with what. And if my opponent brings up where Newman wants to use homeless men to haul rickshaws throughout the city, then I would respond with the fact that: Newman did not act alone in this. He was accompanied by Kramer, a member of the gang that is accused of breaking the law. I must also stress the point that while I have provided multiple times where the gang breaks the law, my opponent can only provide one time where Newman breaks the law. And personally, I find laughing at someone getting robbed at gunpoint much more serious than Newman AND Kramer using homeless men to pull rickshaws. Also, my opponent must argue that Newman NOT the gang deserved prison time. For the PRO to fully support this, they must also agree that the gang must not get jail time. However, with the evidence I have provided today, I have supported the fact that the gang DOES deserve jail time. Jerry stole a loaf of bread from an old lady off the street at night. Elaine touched someone's breasts to see if they were real. George parked in a handicap spot at the mall, which ultimately lead to a woman going to the hospital. And finally, the entire gang laughed at the sight of a man getting robbed and held up at gunpoint, while being very dis-respectful, making fun of his weight. If these do not call for jail time, then what does? Trying to give a job to a homeless man? I do not understand how a respected employee of the U.S.P.S. should be given jail time, whereas people who have broken the law multiple times should not. I must make it apparent that not only must my opponent refute the point that the gang deserves jail time, but they must also prove the point why Newman does. Please consider this when voting. I feel I have done the appropriate job of showing why Newman, a man who aided in committing one crime should be put on trial, over a group of four people who have broken the law many times. Finally, I would like to thank my opponent for this interesting debate, as I always assumed my knowledge of Seinfeld would come in handy at least once in my life. It is for all of the reasons I have stated above that I urge a CON ballot.