In the classic courtroom speech, two components were central for persuasion: the narratio and the argumentatio. In contemporary legal rhetoric, both story telling as well as providing and requesting reasons play a central role in the production of knowledge within legal proceedings. In linguistics, narration and argumentation are often considered to be fundamentally distinct forms of text. In classical rhetoric, however, the two have not been considered to be mutually exclusive. The boundaries between them have also not been strictly drawn in contemporary theory. This paper therefore investigates the relationship between narration and argumentation within criminal proceedings through examining the example of an actual criminal case. Firstly, I shall briefly discuss the contrasting perspectives regarding criminal proceedings, focusing upon the views of narrative and argumentation theory. Secondly, I will follow a theme through the proceedings with respect to its narrative and argumentative forms and functions. I argue that within criminal proceedings, stories are established as products of a process of ‘truth-constitution’ through their transformation into arguments.