With this perspective in mind, it is not surprising that the family’s untimely loss of their mother had left them seeking a cause for her demise. Like most people, Madumo’s family experienced a psychological desire for the rationalization of tragedy; they needed something to blame and justice to be enforced. Madumo’s accrued enmity from his family made him the primary suspect. Consequently, when a prophet informed Madumo’s brother that their mother’s death was an inside job, Madumo was charged with his mother’s bewitchment and death. Ironically, Madumo concludes that he has been bewitched himself. Just as his family had rationalized their difficulties, Madumo too sought a reason
In the book, And Then There Were None by Agatha Christie, I was surprised that the judge decided that Anthony Marston was the least guilty. In my opinion, he was the most guilty. Not only was he drinking and driving, but he ran over two kids and felt no remorse whatsoever. If he wasn't as guilty, then he would have at least felt bad about what he did.
In the world renowned play Twelve Angry Men, the accused’s innocence or guilt is never resolved. Set in the New York summer of 1957, the playwright Reginald Rose explores themes of prejudice and the right to justice in his play and surprisingly finishes his play without a verdict. However there are many signs which directly encourage the reader to believe that the defendant is not guilty. The quintessential nature of this epiphany is displayed when Juror 3 finally concedes that the defendant is not guilty and all 12 jurors walk out of the jury room. This is a solid example of the accused’s guilt being resolved.
In Act 3 Scene I: we also see a large amount of both physical and verbal conflict when Tybalt seeks further confrontation, however, Romeo refuses to fight and instead Mercutio becomes involved in the battle. The metaphor “These hot days is the mad blood stirring” Is used to compare the heat of the day with the heat of their hatred. “mad blood” is also personification used to describe their anger and creates depth and drama in Mercutio’s statement. The physical conflict also occurs in this scene and as a result, Mercutio is killed by Tybalt. Mercutio’s fatal wound brings him to his realization that the group conflict between the Capulets and the Montagues has cost him his life. Before passing Mercutio wishes that bad things come to both families by saying “a plague a’ both your houses” This can be seen as foreshadowing since bad things do
Adnan Syed is innocent. I believe this because one, everyone says things that don’t make sense or don’t add up. Two, how could Adnan do this if he cared for Hae as much as he says he does? Three, every time it seems like the blame should fall on Adnan, people doubt that he’s not the one to blame. First, Adnan Syed is innocent in my eyes because all of his witnesses say different things and things that don’t add up. For example, almost all of the witnesses said a lot of “he was probably there”, and “from what I can recall”. Next, Adnan cares and wants the best for Hae, so why would he kill her? Adnan stated that he just wanted her to be happy that’s all he cared about, does that sound like a murder to you? Lastly, there’s too much doubt on
As a friend of Romeo’s, Mercutio supports the Montague’s in the ancient feud. An example of Mercutio defending the Montague’s is when Tybalt, a member of the loathed Capulet family, abuses Romeo and Mercutio intervenes on Romeo’s behalf. Attempting to restore peace, Romeo gets between the two combatants and Mercutio “hath got his mortal hurt” (Page 149; Act 3, Scene 1) on Romeo’s account. In spite of his “life shall pay the forfeit of peace” (page 17; Act 1, Scene 1), Romeo seeks revenge on Tybalt as he loves his murdered friend. As Romeo kills Tybalt out of love for Mercutio, Shakespeare suggests that love conquered the thought of being penalized with death.
A lot of people wonder if Adnan Syed is guilty or innocent, today as a legal assistant I'm going to tell you one important reason why he is innocent. Adnan is not guilty because there is another potential suspect like Jay. Jay's story that "proves" Adnan's guilt, has changed every interview and testimony. Jay had intimate knowledge of the crime he knew things, like if he knew every single thing that Adnan was thinking about which makes everything looked suspicious. Also Jay's stories don't quite match Adnan's cell records.
Despite the fact that Piggy is the least innocent character, Golding shows how Piggy is also knowledgeable and knows how to complement the idea of surviving to actually knowing the solution. After creating the idea of a solution to have shelter, Piggy tells everyone that they need to build huts across the beach.The idea that Ralph and Jack had were to make a signal fire, but Piggy did not think this was correct to do, and he said that shelters were their main priority. This shows how Piggy has the capability to think of solutions quickly and that he sticks to his idea. The idea of thinking quickly shows his knowledge about survival, and no one else in the group knows which makes him unique and better suited to lead everyone. The combination
Feeling guilty, Romeo feels responsible for Mercutio’s dying because as Mercutio is about to die, he blames Romeo for his loss. Trying to redeem himself he kills Tybalt in vengeance for Mercutio. Afterwards, the Prince banishes Romeo from Verona for the murder of Tybalt. Romeo kills Tybalt on impulse and does not think about the consequences and acts before he thinks. Romeo does not think at all when he kills Juliet’s cousin Tybalt. Romeo’s banishing is one of the most
From the very start, he assumes that the defendant of the case killed his father before they even discussed the parameters surrounding the case. His preconceived opinion of the boy is detrimental to the case at hand, all the while when the boy’s life is at stake. However, his prejudice is only one of his shortcomings.
This example only gives the audience a teasing taste for what is about to happen as a result of Tybalt’s short temper. Fast forwarding to act three, Tybalt’s impulsive behavior is far more drastic and impactful to the play this time around. At the town square of Verona, Tybalt and his compatriots run into Mercutio and Romeo. Still infuriated by Romeo’s presence at his family’s ball, Tybalt decides to vent his anger by challenging Romeo to battle him. When Romeo backs away, Mercutio steps in and fights with Tybalt. After a while of fighting, the distressed Romeo steps in to break it up, but, “Tybalt, reaching under Romeo’s arm, stabs Mercutio and flees” (3.1.82). Mercutio announces that, “I am hurt” (3.1.83), and eventually dies. After witnessing his friend be slaughtered, Romeo seeks revenge on Tybalt, and subsequently slays the murderer of his best friend. As a result of Romeo’s actions, the inamorato is banished to Mantua. When putting the pieces together, the audience watching the play can see how Tybalt, and not Romeo, is responsible for the banishment. Romeo was simply seeking to avenge the life of his friend, while Tybalt’s actions were a direct result of violent thinking. Tybalt’s choice to fight and kill one of the play’s main characters highlights the high degree of his vicious personality. Tybalt’s actions end up dooming the peaceful partnership of Romeo and Juliet and thus the outcome of the play takes a turn for the
Uriah refused to go home to his wife, so David sent Uriah to the front lines of battle, where he was killed. David then married Bathsheba. When confronted by Nathan the prophet, David admitted his sin. In punishment, Bathsheba’s child died and David was cursed with the promise of a rebellion from within his own house. Bathsheba and David soon conceived a second son, Solomon.
”We first encounter David as a lad in his father’s home at Bethlehem, where Samuel anointed him king over Israel (I Sam. 16 1 -13).2 A little later on he is called in to relieve Saul’s insanity by playing the lyre and is appointed Saul’s armour-bearer (I Sam. 16 14-23).3 His next appearance is in Saul’s camp when Israel is fighting the Philistines.”