The Attorney For The Damned

U.S. lawyer, Clarence Darrow, in his 1924 Plea for Mercy, explains why two boys that have committed a murder, should not be executed. Darrow’s purpose is to explain to the jury that even though these children have committed a crime, they still have families and lives to live too. He paints a direct tone of sympathy in order to remind the jury that in this time of violence, these boys didn’t truly know what was going on. He uses rhetorical appeals such as fear, intelligence, and plain folk to get his point across.

“Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption” is an inspiring memoir written by American lawyer, social justice activist, and founder of the Equal Justice Initiative, Bryan Stevenson. Stevenson’s story reveals a poignant insider view of the racial and economic injustice within our criminal justice system. Stevenson illustrates through his impassioned storytelling, that the use of technicalities and plea-bargains, and the lack of safeguards against corrupt legal officials in our adversarial system of justice in effect, is the main contributor to the injustice that plague our justice system and perpetuates the cycle of oppression for the most vulnerable and defenseless members of our

Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood presents a striking argument within the text; was the trail for Edwards and Hickock air and objective? After thoroughly researching and interviewing the convicts as well as the case, it was evident that Capote strongly opposed the death penalty given to Perry and Dick. Capote depicts the unjust trial taken upon the convicts, evoking sympathy from the audience without sacrificing the objectivity of the book. He effectively demonstrates strong usage of rhetoric to prove his argument.

In State of Oregon v. Kipland Kinkel, Judge Haselton summarizes the decision to deny Kinkel’s appeal of his sentencing. Kinkel was sentenced by the Lower Court to 111 years and 8 months for the confession of 4 murders and 25 accounts of attempted murder. Several medical personal and parents testified against Kinkel at the hearing stating that, “he is and remains dangerous,” (para. 15). The defense’s grounds for appeal consist of the sentencing being cruel and unusual and that the protection of society was considered more than reformation. The higher court denied it was cruel and unusual because it did not shock the conscience. The presiding judge also denied that reformation was of higher significance than the protection of society because there were multiple victims affected in a public setting.

The Walter McMillian, Joe Sullivan, and George Daniel cases all have a lasting impact on Bryan Stevenson and his novel, Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption. The underlying theme found in each case is that of being wrongly convicted of a crime. Unlike many of Stevenson’s cases, these three end positively - with either a lesser sentence, or the removal from prison. These accomplishments, however, took much time and effort due to the differing factors of each case, making them unique and one of a kind. Nonetheless, all three cases share one common detail, Bryan Stevenson and his practice, the Equal Justice Initiative, work to help these men gain the freedom that was stolen from them.

There are always two sides to an argument, but different people have different opinions on which side is right and wrong; as a result, we can compare a debate or argument as of a coin, due to the fact that it has two sides. When it comes to the topic of judicial system in America, most of us will readily agree that it needs to be reformed. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of who will step forward and make changes to the court system. Whereas some are convinced that no one is going to do anything about it, others maintain that the government will be the savior by making the changes. In the introduction of Just Mercy: A Story of Justice And Redemption, by Bryan Stevenson -an American lawyer, social justice activist, founder and executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative, and a clinical professor at New York University School of Law- Stevenson emphasizes that people are not being treated fairly in the judicial system of America. The book was written to give readers a close up look on mass incarceration and extreme punishment given in America. Convincing the readers is not easy, except if the author uses strategic techniques such as ethos, pathos, and logos. It is even more tough if the topic is sensitive and debatable as this one. Stevenson used these three techniques in a variety of different ways to convince the readers.

Are some lives worth more than others? Are some lives worthy to be considered lives at all? Bryan Stevenson aims to answer that in his book Just Mercy. In it, he explores the American justice system and its systemic prejudice, whether it’s based on race, income, or gender. Stevenson is a lawyer who founded the Equal Justice Initiative (EJI), an Alabama-based nonprofit that aims to defend those who have been unfairly represented or unjustly imprisoned, and Just Mercy is a compilation of some of the cases he encountered during his time. Just Mercy is a collection of redemption and corruption--almost everyone he represents in the story finds their freedom from the unnecessarily harsh sentences they were given. In every other chapter he details the stories of multiple people punished by the legal system, including women and children. It is notable that throughout these chapters Stevenson emphasizes real, human connections with his clients to shine light on how distant and unjust the prison system is. In a system where these people are given subhuman treatment, Stevenson reaffirms their inherent dignity and cares for them. This has a profound effect on them and the people around them, seen especially in the cases of Charlie (Chapter 6), Joe Sullivan (Chapter 14), and Avery Jenkins (Chapter 10).

A broken; crooked Justice System is a sad but unforgotten tale of our nation. “Just Mercy” tells the everyday motif of an innocent person wrongfully convicted to death until new DNA evidence has been brought up. Even the states that still sentence people to capital punishment have botched people’s lives and cleared them of all charges years after their execution. “Just Mercy,” personalizes the struggle and hardship minorities face every day while dealing with injustice in the story of one lawyer Bryan Stevenson.

Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood presents a striking argument within the text: was the trial for Edwards and Hickock fair and objective? After thoroughly researching and interviewing the convicts as well as the case, it was evident that Capote strongly opposed the death penalty given to Perry and Dick. Capote delves into the unjust trial forced upon the convicts, evoking sympathy from the audience without sacrificing the objectivity of the book. He effectively demonstrates

Attorney for the Defense, Charles Darrow, in his closing statement in the defense of Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb begs for even the slightest amount of sympathy from the judge. He does so in hopes that the teenage boys may one day live free lives and that their families have a sense of optimism for the future.

The stories of long grueling hours at his own law firm and driving hours away from home to help clients are the vertebrae of Bryan Stevenson’s book, Just Mercy. Rather than a terribly persuasive story filled with solutions to making this world a better place; Stevenson marries his triumphs and failures of being an lawyer to the emotional journey him and his clients take everyday. This formula allows readers to be stimulated throughout the entirety of the book whilst possibly making truer views and opinions about our country’s justice system.

One man’s definition of justice may not resemble what others believe. It has been shown throughout the history of the United States that justice is a flexible term. When the colonist came over to America they believed they were just in conquering the Native Americans, however, the Native Americans believed they too were just when they fought back against the colonist, killing their women and children. The African slaves rose up and fought for the rights that were stripped away by the colonist, yet the Colonist believed that since the slaves did not believe in their God this behavior is acceptable. In the short story, “Cruelty the Human Heart”, the author O’Neil De Noux reveals to us Nathan Grey’s distorted view of justice; showing

David Bruck, attorney, disagrees with Edward Koch, that the death penalty “affirms life” (1985). David Bruck uses the example of the execution of Joseph Carl Shaw (page 1)

Many death row inmates were convicted while being defended by a court appointed lawyer who are often the worst paid and most inexperienced and least skillful lawyers. The Bar Association published guidelines for a good defense in a death penalty case”. Anti-death Penalty ( 2010)

In Stephen Bright’s article, “The Death Penalty as the Answer to Crime: Costly, Counterproductive, and Corrupting” Bright asserts that capital punishment does not work because it is racially biased, the quality of the lawyers and attorneys supplied by the state to poor defendants is unfair, and that the law system currently in place does not accomplish its true goals. Bright defends his claim with logos and ethos by examining the opinions of judges and district attorneys, and by describing experience within the fields of human rights and law himself in order to persuade the reader to take up more cases for those on death row. Given the language used in this article Bright is writing to an audience with intermediate to professional experience within the field of law, and a willingness to adopt a new idea on the constitutionality behind the death penalty.