Shortly after the conflict at Harpers Ferry was resolved, “Brown was convicted of treason and murder and was sentenced to hang” (TAJ, 553). His death issued a plethora of different reactions and outrage. For instance, many were relieved that Brown would no longer be able to continue his insane schemes against slavery. Even Northerners criticized Brown for not choosing to oppose slavery in a peaceful manner. Others, like Ralph Waldo Emerson, “...called Brown a martyr-a person who dies for a cause he believes in” (TAJ, 553).
Werner Dubois, one of the SS men had admitted he was guilty and said, “It is clear to me that in the extermination camp, murder was committed. What I have done was only to assist in the murder. If I were to be found guilty it would be justified, murder is murder. We are all guilty." They were all found guilty and were executed for their
Step into the shoes of Cameron Todd Willingham. He was one of the 59 accused criminals sentenced to death by the United States judicial system in 2004. Thought to have murdered his three children by arson in the family home, Willingham was put on death row on January 8, 1992. However, he was different from the other convicts. Willingham was actually innocent.
Warren McCleskey was convicted of armed robbery and the murder of a white police officer. At his trial the jury found him guilty and sentenced him to death. McCleskey challenged his death sentence and claimed that he was being subjected to racial discrimination and provided statistical evidence showing racial disparities in the administration of death sentences. He also presented strong evidence showing that African Americans have been disproportionately sentenced to capital punishment compared to white Americans. While I obviously think that what McCleskey did was wrong, I definitely think that he was right to challenge the constitutionality of his death sentence.
In 2016, Dylann Roof was convicted for the murders of 9 innocent African Americans who were worshipping. It was seen as a hate crime. He was sentenced to death in November of 2017. This is justified because he killed 9 innocent people because of the color of their skin and would have killed even more if he was not caught by the police. Lives were saved because he was caught and sentenced to death.
What do A Lesson Before Dying and To Kill A Mockingbird have in common? Both books take place in the prejudiced south, an African-American character is killed, and both books show the reader how justice was handled when a person of color was brought to court. A Lesson Before Dying is similar to To Kill A Mockingbird because both books have a similar theme of injustice, the convicted characters are truly innocent, and both books end with a tragic death. In the first chapter of A Lesson Before Dying, the reader is introduced to Jefferson, a young black male who is convicted of murdering a white shopkeeper and robbing his store. However, even though Jefferson's lawyer claims that Jefferson is innocent, he begins using Jefferson's lack of knowledge
In May, 1924, two boys, Nathan Leopold Jr. and Richard Loeb, sought to commit the perfect crime: kidnapping and murdering their 14-year-old neighbor, Robert Franks. However, instead of executing the perfect crime, they were caught the following day and were sure to be hung. Their families hired a defense attorney by the name of Clarence Darrow who made one of the most influential and well-known speeches against the death penalty: “A Plea for Mercy.” Darrow utilizes historical references, logical and emotional appeals, anaphora, and persona, to sway the court to not employ the death penalty for Leopold and Loebs’ murder. Darrow explains the relationship between past wars and contemporary themes and a large part of that is society changing to be more forgiving. He also uses these devices to show that society is partly to blame for this butchery and could have avoided this ridiculous situation had they changed.
In the story The Stranger by Albert Camus, Meursault, the absurd hero is put on trial. Meursault is put on trial first of all for his senseless murder, but that is not the only reason. The main reason he was put on trial, was for his Maman’s death and his act of senselessness. From Meursault 's point of view we see that the bailiff questions people like Perez Maman’s fiance. The bailiff asked Perez, “Had [you] at least seen [him] cry?”(Camus 91).
But, now the man is now facing 45 years in jail. I feel as if the man deserved more time in prison, because it was first-degree murder. Meaning he planned what he was going to do and how it was all going to happen. The man who killed his wife was selfish, he choose money over someone’s life. What he did was wrong, and I feel as if he deserved more time in jail.
But, they had to start somewhere… • However, despite both Atticus and Rosser’s efforts, Tom Robinson and Leo Frank were both found guilty. • In jail, Leo Frank had his throat slashed by a fellow prisoner, but was able to survive. However, on August 15, 1915, “the best citizens” of Mary Phagan’s hometown stormed the jail, kidnapped him, and lynched him the next morning. The civilians stood and posed proudly after performing such a heinous crime. • The lynch mob that killed Leo Frank is quite similar to the lynch mob that came after Tom Robinson.
At the end of the trial, both were found guilty and executed. Despite the many controversies and doubt as to whether these two men actually committed the crime, the frightened public blamed them anyway. On May 1, 1920, a rumor began spreading that a major uprising would occur, however, this rumor never came to be true. It was not until September 16, 1920, that another bomb exploded, this time on Wall Street. 38 people lost their lives, and more than 140 were injured.
American sniper Chris Kyle was murdered February 2, 2013. His murderer Eddie Ray Routh plead insane and blamed mental illness, he was found guilty of his crimes and sentenced to life in prison after the evidence of him ordering fast food after the murder was brought forth. An act he cannot perform with his “mental illness.” Ruth Lee Johnson J.D. graduate of Harvard Law school writes about the defense saying “Insanity is a legal term, not a medical term.” This gives the jury the power to determine insanity, opposed to a psychologist. Does the jury have the qualifications to make such decisions and even if some are truly insane how can you differentiate between them and those who want an easy way out?
It has been in the news countless times in the past few years that a young black man, a young black woman, a young black child being murdered by the police or civilians who have not right to shoot people and getting away with it with no trouble. It is easy to claim self defense when there is the widespread notion that black people are dangerous thugs, and that all black people are “racist” toward white people. When white people recount how they defended themselves, such as in the case of Mike Brown being described by his murderer as an evil, aggressive, Hulk Hogan-like demon (Officer Darren Wilson’s Grand Jury Testimony in Ferguson, Mo., Shooting), it is easy to say that yes, they were justified in defending themselves. But black people are not demons, they are not evil, and when someone is half an inch taller than you and, as it is widely accepted, is not attacking you, you have no right to compare him to Hulk