Holmes Argumentative Essay: The Adventure Of The Speckled Band

At the conclusion of this vivid literary work by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Dr. Grimesby Roylott dies after being bitten by a Swamp Adder, the most venomous snake in India. I believe that Sherlock Holmes was not accountable for the passing of Dr. Roylott and was entirely innocent. When Sherlock initially saw the deadly creature he knew he had to act swiftly and defend himself and Dr. Watson. Furthermore, Dr. Roylott knew the treacherous snake would return eventually; yet, he still sat in the chair which left him vulnerable. The most vital fact is that, how was Sherlock to know that Dr. Roylott was in a susceptible position in the next room?

He had to find out who was lying and who was telling the truth. Also he had be careful in blaming others because he did not want to offend anyone. In the end Hercule discovered that revenge was the motive for the murder of Cassetti. He let the passengers off the hook and didn 't tell the police the true story. Hercule did this because he knew that Cassetti was a bad man and did many evil things to the Armstong Family.

Severus Snape Persuasive Essay Although Severus Snape held the key to defeating the evilest wizard alive, he was not a good-hearted person by any means. Some might say, “But he did it on Dumbledore’s orders!” While he kept his secret, he still held a grudge against the 4 marauders and loathed anyone who was related to them. He took every chance possible to show this loathing and called the girl who he supposedly loved the worst insult possible. All these things are not nulled by the single action of giving the boy who lived the information he needed at the time. So, what did Snape commit?

The reason for violence the narrator used was because of the old mans eye. The narrator had no problems with the old man, but the narrator kills him just because of the old mans appearance. The violence the narrator has done led to his concealment of the body. The narrator tries to tell the readers that he is a sane person by all the precautionary actions he had taken to conceal the body. The readers will be able to tell that the narrator is completely insane, when he thinks it is okay for someone to chop up a dead man: “I worked hastily, but in silence.

The first person to die by the monster’s hand is his brother William. Victor does not reveal himself as the true murderer to Elizabeth since “the anguish that [is] visible in [his] countenance betray[s] the secret to [her]” (78). He stays silent due to the fact that he does not want to be blamed for the murder of his brother therefore distancing himself from the monster. Victor also puts himself in front of others when he does not say a word after Justine is wrongly convicted and executed for the murder of William. He does not vouch for her innocence as “such a declaration would have been considered as the ravings of a madman” (90).

This colloquial diction used by Capote exemplifies the blatant lack of respect for human life that Dick has. The nonchalant attitude that Dick has about the murders is the exact difference between the two accomplices. Perry is questioning what they had done where Dick is so loose that he even makes a little joke about the events. As Perry is sugar coating the murders to help him deal with it, Dick is the exact opposite. He is cracking jokes about the murders, he is so comfortable with the fact that he had just been an accomplice in the murdering of 4 people that he is making jokes about it.

You may think killing someone is wrong, no matter the circumstance, but there are some cases where murder is the only option. In John Steinbeck 's Of Mice and Men George kills his friend Lennie, but what you don 't know is that Lennie 's death was justified. Even though it is wrong to kill someone george did nothing wrong in the situation he was put in. George is innocent because he new Lennie would get in more trouble, George also knew that the dream would never come true, so he had to end it, George knew that if he didn

In the story “The Cask of Amontillado” by Edgar Allan Poe the character Montresor killed a man by the name of Fortunato by chaining him up and walling him in. Montresor did and does not feel guilt for this crime. He did not feel guilt for this crime because he believed he was right for doing so. That reason is because Fortunato insulted him and because they were upper class it was more serious even though it never states in the story of what Fortunato said. Montresor only felt a little guilty and that was when he sealed the last brick down other than that he did not feel guilt especially if he kept it a secret for fifty years.

The meaninglessness of life is a major theme in The Stranger. Meursault seems to have no reasons for his actions such as marrying Marie even though he’s never thought about it before she mentioned it, writing the letter for Raymond, and killing Raymond’s mistress’ brother. Everyone around him tries to rationalize Meursault 's actions. At the court they try to figure out Meursault 's reasoning for killing the Arab man. The prosecutor and Meursault 's lawyer come up with explanations based on logic and reason, yet Meursault doesn’t really seem to care about what he has done and doesn’t want to think about it either.

It’s not Mersault’s actions that influence his crime, but rather his lack of actions. His apathy for everything and the absurd causes him to place life to near or on no value whatsoever. Since he feels no remorse for Maman’s death, he certainly won’t feel anything for a stranger’s death even if he murdered him. The court looked into Mersualt’s private life and found details about the death of his mother. When Mersault’s lawyer is talking to him and it is said that, “The investigators had learned that I had “shown insensitivity” on the day of Maman’s funeral” (Camus 64).