Tailyn Marion
Mrs. Juhas
6/7th hour
2/10/23
Are You a Monster? Victor Hugo once said, “Adversity makes men, and prosperity makes monsters.” Steve was on trial for murder. Steve kept doubting himself a lot while he was in his jail cell. He didn’t know whether he was guilty or innocent, he also was lying while it was his testimony. In the novel, Monster, by Walter Dean Myers, Steve Harmon was a monster because he lied and because he knew about the robbery.
Steve was a monster because he lied. Steve was talking in a flashback. The book said, “‘Usually I see him in the playground. Maybe he’d say something like “Those guys can’t play ball,” stuff like that.’” (Myers 226). So when Steve gave his testimony he started lying saying things like how
…show more content…
Him being found not guilty was a good thing because all 12 people in the jury agreed that he didn’t do anything wrong. The jury decided that he didn’t deserve a punishment because he didn’t commit a crime during the robbery, so they said he isn’t guilty.However, just because Steve was found not guilty doesn’t mean he was innocent. Therefore, Steve was a monster.Steve was a monster because he always doubts himself. Steve was in his cell writing in his journal.The book said, “We lie to ourselves here. Maybe we are here because we lie to ourselves.” (Myers 203).This shows he is a monster because he is doubting himself the whole time throughout his journal. The quote was basically saying how Steve thinks that he is lying to the court which he is but he doubts himself for lying, and he is saying how maybe people are in jail because they lie to people to court or even to themselves. There is more evidence of him being a monster because in the book when it was time for him to do his testimony he lied in the courtroom and could’ve been found guilty if they would’ve checked his journal. There is also evidence of him doubting himself as well throughout his journal in his jail cell, because basically he doesn’t know if he is guilty or
Steve was a Monster because He lied and doubted himself. During the quote, Steve
but i'm just going to name the top three. First steve has a guilty conscious Which means he's doubting himself about being the lookout. If he knew he wasn't a bad person Than he wouldn't be trying to convince everyone that he is a good person. Another reason is steve has multiple witnesses.
Steve might have gone into the drugstore then left because he was scared. However, this still means that Steve would be charged with felony murder if he would have admitted it to the jury and they ruled him guilty, he would have gotten a lesser sentence because he was not fully involved. O'Brien also made another point that could make some room for reasonable doubt in her closing statements. After she repeated to the jury the conversation where Mrs. Petrocelli and Mr. Evans talked about what happened after the robbery, she brings up the point “Where was Steve Harmon, the alleged lookout man?”(249). If Steve was really a part of this robbery you would think that he would go with Evans and King after to eat and get his share of the money from the
Steven said that he was not guilty and he dropped her not harmed. He also said that he just happened to look back while he stopped on a bridge riding his bike and he saw that Lynne entered into a grey car. Some witnesses testified that Steven really did all those things. They also said that they saw Steven normal on the school grounds.
This is proved when Mr. Sawicki testifies. In the novel Mr. Sawicki testifies stating, “‘He’s very much involved with depicting his neighborhood and environment in a positive manner.’” (Myers 235). Throughout the novel there weren't a lot of people that testified about Steve. In fact, there were probably only three people.
Although you might wonder why I mentioned the money saying he might have participated, the main reason they committed the crime was for money. So why did Steve not get paid? I am writing this essay to prove that Steve correctly proved his innocence to the judge and juries. The first major evidence is that Lorelle Henry did not witness Steve in the store while she was there.
In the courtroom Steve had some troubles with a lot of racism and prejudice. Steve decided to go on the stand to prove his point otherwise they wouldn't believe him and the task wasn’t that easy but somehow he managed. The jury saw him through and he was claimed not guilty. His lawyer O’Brien wasn’t that happy in fact we think that she thought he was actually
Steve is in his cell thinking to himself. The author wrote,“It was me who lay on the cot wondering if I was fooling myself.” (Myers 148). Throughout the story every time Steve goes to his cell and thinks and starts to doubt himself as it shows in the quote that you just seen. This shows that Steve is a monster because he is wondering if he’s lying to himself.
Steve is portrayed as a victim of a racist legal system that assumes his guilt based on his race and appearance. I can show this using this quote said by Steve's lawyer, “My job is to make sure the law works for you as well as against you, and to make you a human being in the eyes of the jury. ”(Walter Dean Myers) This quote shows how his lawyer sees how race could play a role in whether or not the jury decides whether or not he is guilty. The prosecutor and police officers involved in the case are all white, and they use racial stereotypes and assumptions to build their case against Steve.
He stated that he suffered from insomnia. It is completely normal to look at the sky at night. It is almost unnatural if you never look at the stars. After this incident, they accused Steve, a calm man who had not blamed the others.
Steve Harmons actions depicted his characteristics and we can, therefore, conclude that Steve Harmon is a liar as he lied under oath. Steve was also a guilt-ridden man ashamed of his actions. People who disagree may claim that Steve was undoubtedly innocent as Lorelle Henry, a witness, declared that there were only 2 people, proven to be James King and Bobo Evans, inside the store who eventually murdered Mr.Nesbitt. This may be a strong argument because it shows that Steve was not in the drugstore and could be really innocent. On the contrary, however, Steve’s job was just supposed to be a lookout and ensure that the drugstore was clear of cops or anyone inside.
His wording shows that he doesn’t know who he is and therefore believes he is a Monster as Ms. Petrocelli calls him. He accepts people’s judgments as his self-truth. Even though, he, himself, accepts the worst he still wants people to perceive him as a good person, especially his mom. Steve’s mom’s words cut deeper in him because his mom believes he didn’t do it while he knows he did. 5 days into the trial, his mother comes by and talks to him hoping to make him feel better, “I could still feel Mama’s pain.
Steve is convinced that he himself is
He said that he did not go in the store that day but he did. He also said that he is not friends with James king but he is. He also said that he will not lie during the testimony. but he lied six times during the testimony. Steve was a monster because he did not tell the police about the
We know this when the author wrote, “I didn’t kill Mr. Nesbitt.” (Myers 140). Steve is a good person because he didn’t kill Mr. Nesbitt and we know this because later in