The word “Muslim” carries with it quite a bit of baggage since the horrid day of the 9/11 attack, and even before it as well. Many people recoil at just the sight of a Muslim woman’s covered head. The first thought that comes to mind, for many people, when picturing a Muslim is a rural man wearing a turban and speaking a foreign language. This image has not only greatly bothered many American Muslims; it has massively affected their day-to-day lives. Adnan Syed, for example, was greatly discriminated against in a courtroom whilst fighting for his freedom. How can you possibly defend your innocence when an entire jury has this biased image of you burned into the back of their minds? In episode 2 of the serial podcast, “The Breakup,” Koenig talks about Hae Linn’s dairy containing a crucial part of the evidence that was used in the trail …show more content…
She mentions how one of the jury members asked to be let go, because of the fact that he knew a Muslim who was abusive to his wife, and that that made him incapable of being fair to the Muslim defendant. That makes you wonder, how many of the jury members had this very same thought and just did not come forward? Also, it is stated that during the trial one of the prosecutors opposing a bail referred to Adnan as a Pakistani, when he is, in fact, an American citizen born and raised in the United States. He tells the judge stories about other Muslim criminals who fled the country after receiving a bail and ended up in Pakistan as fugitives. He talks about how these fugitives murdered their female partners after having their ego damaged, and how it is an honor in the Muslim custom to kill a woman who opposes her husband. Would these statements affect the way a jury would see a Muslim young man who is being blamed for a female’s murder? Even if he was raised in the United States, and not
In the court, the jury was told a story about a Muslim who committed a crime in America and avoided punishment by fleeing to Pakistan through his
Right at the beginning of the trial one of the potential jurors came up to Judge Mitchell and stated: “A friend of mine that was Muslim faith and I seen him mistreat his family, his wife and everything. I’ve seen this go on between him and his son, he got mad and he did the same thing that father did, so I just couldn’t you know, to be honest with you.” This juror is stereotyping the entire religion just based on the bad actions of these two individuals. It is very obvious that he dislikes that Muslim man and would not consider him as a friend. Also, the prosecutor Vicki Wash during the trial considered Adnan as a Pakistani teenager.
The court got the idea that Adnan is just like other Pakistani Muslim men, that he had connections and can get away with murder. Another piece of information is,”in some cultures women are second class citizens… He just wanted power and she wouldn't give it”(223). These stereotypes are being used against Adnan and make him look like a typical Muslim who abused females. Yet his classmates never said he had acted that way toward anyone.
Is it better to assume a man is guilty based on stereotypes and prejudice? Evidence must be substantial and confessions must never be forced or excessive. All evidence must be legally obtained, but sometimes things don’t happen the way they are supposed to. For in May of 1993, unspeakable acts rocked the community of West Memphis, Arkansas. Three boys would go on an innocent bike ride and never return, and three older boys were blamed.
Is it difficult to tell whether someone is guilty or innocent? In the story of Serial narrated by Sarah Koenig is about a murder case that happened on January 13 1999. This murder happened with a girl named Hae Min Lee and supposedly her ex-boyfriend Adnan Syed happened to commit the murder. Adnan was proven guilty and arrested months later. But, there is news popping up that he has a new trial that will either have him stay in prison, or let him him out.
On October 2016, Univision 14, a spanish channel, showed a documentary in regards to Hate Rising by Jorge Ramos, a well known and influential journalist, writer, and news communicator. He desperately wants to inform to the spanish speaking audience to learn a bit more about what hate and cultural discrimination towards certain individuals is potentially affecting the society we live in today. In addition to the growing white supremacy groups such as the “white power” in the united States. Ramos argues that Donald Trump campaign is one of the main factors in feeding more hate towards latinos, including other types of groups in the United States. In order for Jorge Ramos to develop the documentary, he had to be part of rituals, having conversations,
Martha Gupta and Robert Salinas were high school students in Chicago, Illinois, who had been going out ever since 8th grade. Suddenly problems started to occur and caused their breakup in April, 2015. Multiple sources of conflicts were shown in documents one through eight that led to Robert and Martha’s break up. These documents are composed by notes from friends, images, and text messages which led to instances of them both cheating on each other. Despite Robert and Martha having a seemingly perfect relationship, their cheating tendencies gradually led to their break up.
For example, Muslim people in Dublin are continually experiencing racist actions against them in Work, Education, and dealing with people in society. They experience racism from teachers, employers, the gardaí and the media. Some females even say they have been told they cannot wear their hijabs. In the Islamophobia study carried out in Dublin Muslim woman are said to even be followed round by security guards. (Healy, The Jounal.ie, 2016).
When asked why he voted not guilty, juror eight stated “Look, this boy has been kicked around all his life. You know---living in a slum, his mother dead since he was nine. He spent a year in and a half in an orphanage while his father served a jail term for forgery. That’s not a very good head start. He’s had a pretty terrible sixteen years.
We should improve the laws against hate crimes and even create a few new laws that will allow for an increase in the funding of police departments because it will allow the police officers to be trained properly to be able to identify acts of abuse better. In doing so will allow for a safer environment specifically for Middle Eastern Americans. With the proper training, officers can use religion as an aspect of investigation and not identification which is discussed in the paper “Walking While Muslim.” In this paper, Margaret Chon and Donna Arzt describe that one of the struggles of being Middle Eastern is automatically being identified as Muslim, and vice versa, even though that may not be the case. Chon and Arzt helped shape my idea of a solution because they declare in their paper that “religion should be closely examined as an analytic category” (Arzt and Chon, 2005) rather than unsystematic when regarding “the law and policy of counter-terrorism” (Arzt and Chon, 2005) because religion cannot be used as a description for a person since it’s a choice.
Guilty or not? The fate of Genghis Khan lay in the hands of the people. Both the prosecution and defense had compelling arguments on the leadership of Khan. The first person that made a compelling argument from the prosecution side was philosopher Ibn al Athir, which was portrayed by Dylan. The testimony of the Ibn al Athir touched on the ethical response to the mass killing and religious tolerance during Khan’s rule.
He says the defendant accused of murder was let off and “eight years later they found out that he’d actually done it, anyway” (12). Prejudice clouds a person’s judgement and does not allow the individual to see all the facts. It only allows them to
The script introduces the viewers to the typical behavior and the state of mind of these jurors, who surprisingly turn out to be the last to change their opinions from “guilty” to “not guilty”. Juror#3 the frustrated father whose personal conflicts and experiences influence his view of the accused’s crime is very desperate to make it clear that his mind is already made up before the deliberations even start. Similar
Spent 3 years being tortured in jail for a crime he did not commit, almost sentenced to life in jail for a murder he had no part in, these are just two examples, coming from 12 Angry Men and the Kalief Browder Story, and everyday stories like these happen, all due to biases. It is so common that people don’t even notice them, most are considered normal. People come to assume certain things from groups of people. It’s not a big deal when people hear someone from a rough area committed a certain crime, people expect that, but when someone from a nice area does the same thing that’s when people make a big deal out of it and don’t believe it. Biases have always been and will always be the cause of false justification in the world.
It is about whether the jury has a reasonable doubt about his guilt. When the first ballot is taken, 10 of his fellow jurors agree that defendant is guilty while there is only one Juror had different view that defendant is innocent. Juror No. 10 begins a racist rant. As he continues, one juror