Did Jacob Kill Ben Rifkin

1688 Words7 Pages
Do you believe Jacob is guilty of the murder of Ben Rifkin? Why or why not? Did he kill Hope? Why or why not? No, I do not believe Jacob had killed Ben Rifkin. With the amount of context involving what Jacob said regarding the murder, it does not persuade me to believe that he did actually kill him. After all Jacob rarely spoke for himself throughout the book, although he was the defendant and it was important to remain in a neutral sense. For Hope, I believe that Jacob did kill her and the amount of blood that he had on his bathing suit was a big hint, unlike the one spot that Jacob had during Ben’s murder. To find out that Hope’s windpipe was crushed right before she was thrown into the ocean did not seem like a consequence whatsoever.…show more content…
If Jacob did not kill Ben Rifkin, I would assume another student did such Derek Yoo. Derek was a very mysterious kid that did not want to give any information away, perhaps because he killed Ben and told his parents. When they got Jacob as the suspect Derek’s parents probably told him to not speak a word about it. Derek would have tired to put the blame on Jacob as much as he could without seeming like he knew a lot about the murder, like a regular witness. Derek did say a couple times that Ben was a mean to people he didn’t like such as Jacob and himself. What was the most damning piece of evidence against Jacob? Was there anything that you felt exonerated him? At First I thought that the knife that Jacob had was a piece that was very hard to disregard, however I feel that the story that Jacob wrote resembling Ben’s murder from the porn site that he always goes on basically was his confession in a sense. To write a story about a murder right after he’s very skeptical, but to know details of the story based from the murder is something that need attention because its shows that he could have been involved. The title of the book is Defending Jacob…was Jacob the main character? If not, who…show more content…
I do not agree at all with the action that Laurie took at the end. It was uncalled for and could have had other ways to solve such a dilemma that Jacob had. Given, I was so surprised because I had no idea that Laurie was capable of doing such a thing, to her own son. To see through the mind of Laurie would have been very beneficial in order to determine the amount of hurt she had towards Jacob, for it was a life or death situation in her mind. Would you recommend Defending Jacob to others? Why or why not? Of course I would recommend this this great book because it shows you that everything is not what it is set out to be. Things can turn in an instant for a crime and it shows that it can drive anyone into the floor. The mind of a young child and the various elements surrounding it that can create a huge disaster among many people. I would highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to experience the unexpected. Name "two" big differences that exist in this book that are in contrast to what we learned this semester? We learned that juveniles do not have the right to a trail by jury or the right to bail when Jacob had both of those things due to the Massachusetts law stated that if a juvenile commits first degree murder to go straight to adult court. Both of those things are two major differences between the book and what we learned in class. If Jacob lived in NJ, do you think that he would have been waived up to adult court? Why or
Open Document