Boy's Murders In The Film Paradise Lost

When the plot is looked at through the Marxist lens, it becomes evident that the final verdict was affected because of the inability of the jurors to interact with each other due to class differences. On top of that, the boy was judged because of his class difference as well. The fourth juror makes known that he is wealthy, the fifth juror had a rough upbringing, and so on.Each juror seemed to be in a slightly different class, which they used this to define themselves. But, by the climax of the play when the eleventh juror responds with “...If you want to vote not guilty, then do it because you're convinced the man is not guilty - not because you've had enough. And if you think he's guilty, then vote that way, or don't you have the guts to

This caused many rallies, riots, peaceful protest. This case informs us now because it also tells us how bad they were treated back then, the people believed the girls because they were white, and mostly overlooked the boys because they were black. So to end this long unfair trial, they were cleared.The latter mentioned in the book To kill a Mockingbird, by author Harper lee.

April 6, 1931, the trials for the Scottsboro boys begin(Uschan 16). The boys were represented by Milo C. Moody and Stephen Roddy who were only given twelve days to prepare for the trials. Stephen was and unpaid, unprepared real estate attorney, and Milo was a forgetful seventy year old local attorney who hadn’t tried a case in a long time (“San Marcos” line 13). The trails were completely unorganized and false information was stated throughout the whole thing. The cross examination of Victoria Price lasted minutes and the defense offered very little information to the judge. Six out of the nine boys ended up denying the rape while 3 admitted to it. Even though the three men didn’t rape the women, because of beatings and threats, they admitted to the gang rape. By the time the trail had ended 8 out of the 9 boys were convicted and sentenced to death. Since one of the Scottsboro boys was only thirteen, he was considered too young to be tried as an adult (“UMKC” par. 6-7).

The film uses juror three to demonstrate how past experiences can influence ones prejudice in decision making. Juror 3, who has a prejudice against the accused, and thinks the kid is under-privileged and doesn’t deserve a second chance, which is reason enough for him to conclude the accused is guilty. As the discussion continues as to the verdict of the trial, juror three grows frustrated and angrily refutes, “What is this? Love your under- privileged bother week or something? (12 Angry Men). Due to his past experiences with young men, he is ready to sentence the defendant to death with weak circumstantial evidence, grows angry as the other jurors question what he refers to as “facts” and claims “You can’t refute facts” (12 Angry Men) As all the Jurors except juror twelve get more and more frustrated by the slowed process, juror three begins to see through his prejudice, and disperses the other jurors interruptions by saying “Be quiet, we’ll all get a turn”(12 Angry Men). It finally becomes clear, he sees similarities with his son he had a falling out with several years ago, and puts this prejudice aside and excepts that the evidence is too circumstantial to convict a kid for murder, and sentence him to death.

It is the juror's responsibility to prove the boy guilty or not. Many of these jurors applied their biases to the way the boy grew up and was treated throughout his life. They have created false accusations that are not necessarily accurate. They argue that teenagers his age have no sense of morality or respect for their elders. Which could be a justifiable reasoning for the murder of his own father. Juror Three appears to be prejudiced towards the boy due to the fact that his own son resented him and moved out. It is not uncommon to develop an explicit bias after generalizing impressions from a personal experience and applying that to all groups of that kind such as age, religion, etc. As Juror Eight votes not guilty during a vote, the third juror becomes infuriated and disagrees while ranting about how the defendant is completely guilty due to evidence. Two different categories came into play as Juror Three expressed his feelings about his own son relating to the boy on

This structure is commonly seen in any film or television production, as using the structure makes sure that the narrative is continuing to move forward, and is developing. The film plot line I will be studying and making an analysis on is The Lost Boys.

Once she got to see her boy and what they did to him she declared that his body would be on display at the Roberts Temple Church of God. His casket was open for anyone to see for a period of about five days. Thousands of people gathered here to witness what two southern men did to a fourteen year old who just flirted with a white waitress. Many were very angry that this happened.

Racial dynamics were influential in the process of the case. There was collision between judges and prosecutors about the venue for the trial. The trial was moved to Baldwin County, a white county where only one African American served as a juror. The makeup of this jury panel would not allow McMillian a fair trial, the community was known to have racial bias undertones (Stevenson, 2014). Not only would the jury not allow McMillian a fair case, but neither would the judge. Robert E. Lee Key did all that was in his power to sway the case in his favor. He tried to persuade Stevenson not to take the case and agreed to move the trial to another county that was much more conservative and had “made less progress leaving behind the racial politics of Jim Crow” (Stevenson, 62). With lack of evidence pinning McMillian

There was no evidence collected and tested at the crime scene which could have proved who committed the murders. A lieutenant who contacted a juvenile officer in Memphis both agreed that the murders had to have been done by someone in a cult. The juvenile officer quickly knew of someone who was involved in a cult and said this juvenile could be capable of a crime like this. The accused, Damien Echols, was immediately interviewed and asked questions that the police believed no one but the killer would know the answers to. The answers that were given by Damien Echols were known answers throughout the community and this made Damien look guilty. Damien’s appearance was very strange and different and he was not considered “normal” in the communities beliefs. He was considered guilty by his Wiccan beliefs and his gothic appearance. Not only was Damien deemed guilty of this crime, but two other boys were also accused of these murders. There are many inconsistencies with the case. The police did not collect all evidence in the woods that could have been collected to possibly link the murders to someone. According to TruTV Crime Library, there was a boy who claimed he saw who committed the murders. He claimed he even saw men who spoke Spanish commit the murders. He later changed his story and said he saw one of the victim’s fathers killing the three boys. This same boy could not even identify two of the boys

During the early nineteen hundreds many people especially in the south were often convicted of crimes for no other reason than their skin color and contrary to many ideas about our court system, we have not always been the most honest and unbiased people. One prime example of this is the case of the Scottsboro Boys and how they were accused of rape and had to go to court numerous times, almost everytime ending in the death sentence. The evidence in the case clearly points towards the innocence of the Scottsboro boys, evidence such as unclear stories from the girls, lack of bruises and marks indicating assault as well as a previous history of prostitution from both of the girls. This evidence helps to prove that Charles Weems and the Scottsboro boys were innocent and wrongly accused and convicted.

the prisoners were lucky enough to escape the being lynched when they were moved into Scottsboro. In this trial, nine young, black boys were charged with the rape of two white girls while on a train. This case was a major source of controversy in the 1930’s. “Despite testimony by doctors who had examined the women that no rape had occurred, the all- white jury convicted the nine, and all but the youngest, who was 12 years old were sentenced to death” (“Scottsboro”). The boys’ lawyer, Samuel Leibowitz, did not even get assigned to the case until the first day of the trial. “If he could show a jury that these nine boys were innocent, as the record indicated, the jury would surely free them. To Leibowitz, that was simple!” (Chalmers 35). However, it was not that simple. Many white citizens would not change their minds about

Throughout the novel the boys experience a change from civilization to savagery.  The change from civilization to savagery was in a sense to be awaited because authority was not present but their gruesome roles in the deaths of two of the boys were not because they’re still kids and one wouldn’t think kids are capable of such

Published first during the decade of the 1990s "The Boy Died in My Alley" remains a significant poem of Gwendolyn Brooks as she moves from traditional forms of poetry such as sonnets, ballads to the most unrestrictive free verse and includes the sad rhythm of the blues. This poem offers an amazing juxtaposition of dramatic poetic forms, narrative, and lyric (Guth & Rico). The story is most often simple but with the last line, they transcend the restriction of place and cover universal plight. Most often the characters of the people are memorable only due to fact that they are trying to survive the trials and tribulations of daily living. For example, in the poem, “The Boy Died in My Alley”, the author narrates an incident when a black boy is murdered in her back alley and the policeman asks her whether she has heard the shot. As she was passionate about the bad experiences of black community in the United States, her poetry is mainly about their plight in the society (Guth & Rico). The main focus of the poem, "The Boy Died in My Alley" is to study and analyze the reasons behind the violence that is associated with African-American children who live on the street.

The Klan continues to threaten Jake with a bomb and burning crosses, Jake’s wife and child have to leave town to avoid danger. Judge Omar Lewis decides to turn down Jake’s request for a change of venue on the grounds that it would be impossible to find a fair and impartial jury in any county in Mississippi. Jury selection begins with protests to “Free Carl Lee” and the Klan protesting outside as well, tensions are high and a riot breaks out. A Klan member is set on fire, the black sheriff is beaten, and Jake is stabbed in the leg. The day ends with the inevitable all white jury. The Klan continues to terrorize the city by burning crosses and burning Jake’s house down. The National Guard is brought into town to prevent riots for the remainder of the trial. The DA, Buckley opens the trail by bringing Cobb’s mother to the stand and showing the gun Carl Lee used to the jury. At the end of the first day Buckley calls Depute Dwayne Luny, the cop who was accidentally shot in the leg the day Carl Lee murdered the two men. Much to the surprise of everyone, Luny does not blame Carl Lee for the loss of his leg, in fact he admits he would have done the same thing if Tonya had been his daughter, he then turns to the jury and repeatedly shouts, “He’s (Carl Lee) a hero- you turn him lose!” the court room uproars in mixed reactions.

Book IX of John Milton’s Paradise Lost presents the Fall as an overwhelmingly tragic event. The tone of the poem changes, and the reader sees how the Fall affects nature and Adam and Eve through the use of description. Later on in Book XII, however, after Adam’s vision of the future, he wonders if he should repent because so much good will stem from his sinful actions. Milton presents a view of the Fall that is not solely tragic, and instead carries a notion of hope, and, perhaps even joy.