Atticus used logos to attempt at logically convincing this racist jury that there was no way Mr. Robinson could have committed the rape. The first fact thrown at the jury was, “The state has not produced one iota of medical evidence”. Which was true, they did not have a doctor confirm that Miss Mayela was actually raped; they instead went by the word of the two most unreliable people in Maycomb County. The fact that Mr. Bob Ewell would not have a doctor confirm that his daughter had been raped had to have been a sign that his story was not credible. The second fact was, “Mayela Ewell was beaten savagely by someone who led almost exclusively with his left”.
Similarly in To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, Tom Robinson is convicted and sentenced to death for the rape of a white woman without any substantial evidence. The only reason he is convicted is because he is a black man fighting against a white man in a court with a prejudiced jury. The theme of prejudice and discrimination is evident in both of these cases because the defendants were charged and convicted merely because they were deemed to be “different” by their close minded societies, questionable evidence from prejudiced sources was used during their trials and because the accusers knew that all those charged could easily be used as scapegoats. The defendants in both of the cases were chosen as suspects because they were deemed to be different by their close minded societies. In the case of the West Memphis Three, the prime suspect in the murder of the young boys, Damian Echols stated, “I wore black and was rumoured to worship Satan, and I was the perfect target when the police ran out of leads” (A Most Heinous Crime Fiona Steel.2003 <http://www.crimelibrary.com/notoriousmurders/famous/memphis/suspect_4.html>).
In the case of Powell v. Alabama we find a perfect example of The Indigent Person’s Right to Appointed Counsel. This means that anyone with the inability to make discussions on their own and in good faith has an unfair trial and should be allowed to have counsel appointed to them. In this particular case nine African-American illiterate boys were found guilty for rapping two white girls. Eight were sentenced to death. The Supreme Court ended up setting aside their convictions stating that the boy’s illiteracy prevented them from having a fair trial and that they were denied the right to appointed counsel.
Atticus Finch a role model for the modern justice. Nelle Harper Lee was born in Monroeville, Alabama. She was the youngest of four children and studied in law school. In 1926 to 1938, she defended two black men accused of murdering a white storekeeper but both were hanged. Lee’s “To kill a mockingbird” is simply about the racial issue during the1930s.
Calling Nooses What They Are –Terrorism vs. Ignore the Noose Makers George Curry starts off his essay by stating a few incidents where nooses have been publicly displayed as an act of racism. He also states the high frequency of such events “Hardly a week passes without reports of some incident involving a noose…” Curry then talks about the origins of the noose in southern America post-civil war. According to Curry, African Americans in the south were viewed as cruel and harmful for white women. He also stated that the lynching of black people was often used as public displays to show Caucasian dominance over African Americans.
Whites were terrified of the idea of a successful Black that anytime they stepped “out of line” they were brutally beaten, harassed or worse similar to the case of the three men in Memphis, lynched. Living as a Black woman in the segregated South Wells witnessed firsthand how racial hatred was affecting the growth of Blacks. This gross injustice defining Black life inspired her to launch a crusade against lynching until her death in 1931. Throughout her examination of economic and social causes of racial oppression such as share cropping, racial riots, voting and the idea of Black males raping white women, she developed her theoretical analysis of lynching in the South. The nation, in theory, believed that they had solved the issue of racism in the United States: not only was the Civil War over, but also, the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments were passed.
The Ole Miss riot of 1962 was fought between Southern segregationist civilians and federal and state forces beginning the night of September 29, 1962; segregationists were protesting the enrollment of James Meredith, a black U.S. military veteran, at the University of Mississippi (known affectionately as Ole Miss) at Oxford, Mississippi. Two civilians were killed execution style during the first night, including a French journalist, and nearly 70 people were wounded. By the end of the conflict, one third of the US Marshals assigned to the campus had been wounded. On September 30, 1962, James H. Meredith became the first African-American student to be enrolled at the University of Mississippi. His entrance had earlier been barred by segregationist Governor Ross Barnett, despite back door discussions with the administration in which he had committed to protect Meredith.
The most apparent victim of racism in âTo Kill a Mockingbirdâ is Tom Robinson, the black man who is accused of raping Mayella Ewell. Falsely accused of the crime by Mayella and her father Bob Ewell, Tom is brought before a prejudiced, white jury for trial. Atticus Finch knows the man is innocent and proves as much, but despite his best efforts, the racism in the minds of the jury wins. They deliver a verdict of guilty. Tom is sentenced to death.
Whether the defendant is white, black, red, or green, the color of the defendant’s skin should not be a factor when deciding a case. It goes against our criminal justice system, and it is completely unfair. With that said, questioning whether or not jury nullifications should be used anymore has become a controversial topic. There are equal numbers of both critics and supports for jury nullifications. Although, whenever there is racial-based jury nullifications configured by a jury, eye brows start to raise by both sides, and people start to question the integrity of the jury system.
Question 1: Although the actual trial of Hossack and the narrative of Minnie Wright occurred during different periods, a trial of Minnie Wright would have also resulted in an innocent verdict for Mrs. Wright. In both periods, women were generally viewed as not being capable of carrying out violent crimes. This perception combined with the fact that the evidence in both cases was circumstantial makes them similar enough to reasonably conclude that Mrs. Wright would also have been found innocent. During the beginning of the 1900’s women where viewed as being inferior to men both physically, mentally, and within the general construct of societal standing. Women lacked the rights of suffrage, property ownership, and a right to trial by their peers (as jurors of both periods were composed of white men), amongst other injustices.