MONSTER The best choices in life are the choices were you and other people know that it is the correct thing to do. The choices we make affect and change our lives for the better or the worst. People should always think about their choices and think about what they will do and how they will affect their self. People make decisions based on what they think and what they care about. In life there are many baffling choices but they can be determined by their conclusion and their opportunity. Steve Harmon was not part of the robbery when it happened. Steve Harmon is a 16 year old kid who is accused of being part of a robbery. The book “Monster” is about a man named Steve Harmon who was accused of being part of a robbery where a man was killed. During the robbery where Mr. Nesbitt was killed Steve Harmon was not the lookout. When the robbery was being planned Steve was the lookout, but decided to not do it. Steve never gave the signal to Bobo and King like he was planned to do. During Steve’s testimony on page 229, Steve said “I don’t know exactly when the robbery Happened, but I wasn’t in the store”. His testimony announced to the court that he wasn’t a member of the robbery. …show more content…
Nesbit. Steve didn’t give King a signal to King and Bobo because he wasn’t part of the robbery. Bobo’s testimony on page 182, said “He was supposed to tell if there was anybody in the drugstore. He didn’t say nothing so we figured it was all right”. Bobo testimony declared that Steve didn’t follow the plan telling the court that he was not part of the robbery. Steve was in the drugstore but wasn’t part of the
Monster is an example of what Patty Campbell would call a “landmark book.” Texts such as these “encourage readers to interact with the text and with one another by employing a variety of devices, among them ambiguity” (Campbell 1) Because it is told through the eyes of Steve himself, the plot can be difficult to decipher. It is ambiguous whether he is innocent or guilty of being involved with the crime. Steve learned to make things unpredictable from his film teacher Mr. Sawicki who teaches him, “If you make your film predictable, they’ll make up their minds about it long before it’s over” (19). Steve took his teacher’s advice and made this film script entirely unpredictable, even after it is over. His lawyer, O’Brien, says in her closing statement, “What can we trace as to the guilt or innocence of my client, Steve Harmon?” (245) This leaves the jury with an undoubtedly difficult decision, as well as the reader, because there are clues to both guilt and innocence in Steve’s case.
nvestigator Tidwell and I went to Searcy PD to interview Scruggs. After making contact with Scruggs an advice and understanding of rights form was completed. Post Miranda Scruggs stated that he was walking down Vinson Rd and saw a black car sitting in the front yard of a house. Scruggs stated he used a pair of pliers to enter the rear door of the house to try and find the keys to the car. Scruggs entered the house and found the keys by the refrigerator along with a purse that contained a debit card. Scruggs stated that he grabbed the items, and then found a small revolver in the kitchen drawer along with bottle of Methadone. Scruggs stated that he also got a flat screen tv. Scruggs stated that he left in the car and took the items to a friend’s
Steven A. Avery was born in Manitowoc County Wisconsin on July, 9,1962. In the year 1985, he was convicted of sexual assault. Victim, Penny Beernsten was assaulted while jogging down a beach in Manitowoc County Wisconsin. Her description of the suspect led the police into pointing fingers towards Steven Avery. He was then arrested, found guilty and sentenced to 32 years in jail for first-degree sexual assault. I believe Steven Avery was innocent because, he was in a completely different location when the sexual assault took place, Law enforcements did not investigate another possible assailant, lastly his DNA did not match the DNA on the crime scene.
In O’Briens closing argument it states that nobody saw Mr. Harmon in the store that day. “The state doesn't even suggest that he was in
The statement, never judge a book by its cover, is known by almost everyone, however, in a world of first impressions, people are always going to treat and judge someone by the way they look and act. The novel, Monster, written by Walter Dean Myers is about a 16-year-old boy, Steve Harmon, who is on trial with James King for felony murder. In the jail and court, it is shown that when the jury or prisoner looks at another, they can instantly tell whether they are strong, or they are timid. The jury in the court can reach their decision just based on first impressions. Being portrayed as cowardly can put one at a major disadvantage.
Lundahl uncovered the victim’s breast from her clothing and put his mouth on them. The defendant told the victim she was “hot” and he wanted to rape her but he did not want to leave his DNA left behind. Mr. Lundahl and the unidentified female threatened to torture the victim in some caves for her bank information until she able to convince them she only had the money they had already taken. Mr. Lundahl exited the residence and moved the victim’s vehicle. When he reentered the house, he was carrying items out of her vehicle. The victim was told not to call police for an hour as they were going to Canada or Mexico. The defendant and the unidentified female left; the victim freed herself and contacted the
Sixteen year old, Steve Harmon is on trial for felony murder for supposedly murdering a drugstore owner. While being in his cell, Steve decides to make a “movie” about his time in jail. Although the trail is stressful enough Steve starts to fight his worst battles which are in his head, trying to figure if he is a true “monster”. The book I read throughout the month of January and February is the book Monster by Walter Dean Myers. Steve Harmon, sixteen-year-old African American from Harlem New York City is on trail for a felony murder. The judges are trying to give him the death penalty meaning he will be in jail for his whole life. Steve goes to his trial and the attorney believes that he is innocent, but with that being said he must not give
In “Killing Monsters”, Gerard Jones describes his personal experiences and his work with children to support his claim of violence in media being beneficial to children. He tells of his childhood and how during it, comic characters and violent fantasies helped him deal with his frustrations and problems. He also describes his interactions with different children and how they used violence to empower them and give them strength. Jones uses all this evidence to assert that violence in media helps children in many ways and shouldn’t be criticized the way it is. While I agree with Jones’ claim that violence in the media can be good for children, I think that his evidence is too personal and weak to strongly support an argument.
Penny was raped while on a run and not only is she lucky she survived but she remembered what the rapist looked like. The description did not match Steven Avery but the detective and friend of Penny just knew that was it was Steven. The detective showed Penny a sketch of Steven who she identified as her attacker and then picked him
Steve Harmon is truly guilty of Felony murder. He shows this in his journal entries. Other admitted participants also show this.In the eyes of the law Steve is giulty because he agreed to go into the store on that
Debated as one of the most misrepresented cases in American legal history, Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald still fights for innocence. Contrary to infallible evidence, prosecution intentionally withheld crucial information aiding MacDonald’s alibi. Such ratification included proof of an outside attack that would have played a major role in Jeffrey’s case.
In the world today, there are many people who make bad decisions. For example, talking to a friend when the teacher is teaching, drinking soda before playing a instrument, or even forgetting to eat breakfast. One must understand that for every action there are consequences, some worse than others. In the book ‘Monster’ Steve Harmon was indeed the lookout for the robbery, but was not responsible for the murder of Mr. Nisbet (the store owner). How is this so apparent? While reading the book there are several clues as to why Steve was the lookout but not the murderer. For example there’s a scene where Steve is talking to James King about being the lookout, a scene where he lies under oath, and he was at the scene of the crime just before it went
In Monster, Steve is on trial for murder of Mr.Nesbitt and is in the hands of the jury to decide his fate, they declare he is not guilty and Jaime King guilty. The theme of Monster is, people are judged by the acquaintances they have and the people they associate themselves with. This theme is proved by, King wanted to be associated with Steve and Steve wanting to seperate from King, who Steve’s friends are and what they talk about and how Steve’s role in the robbery was caused by his friends and his friends were the ones mostly involved. Even though the jury declared Steve not guilty does not mean that he is, Steve may have been with the wrong crowd, but what if he was just like his friends and got lucky and won the
Peter Brooks' essay "What Is a Monster" tackles many complex ideas within Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and the main concept that is the title of the essay itself. What is the definition of a monster, or to be monstrous? Is a monster the classic representation we know, green skin, neck bolts, grunting and groaning? A cartoon wishing to deliver sugary cereal? or someone we dislike so greatly their qualities invade our language and affect our interpretation of their image and physical being? Brooks' essay approaches this question by using Shelley's narrative structure to examine how language, not nature, is mainly accountable for creating the idea of the monstrous body.
A monster is a group that doesn’t obey common societal rules or regulations and is often viewed as an oddity of our society, according to Jeffrey Cohen’s Monster Culture. When the dominant part of our society trusts in an idea or holds something to be legitimate, the monsters dependably trust the inverse. Monster’s have the aspects to think outside the common societal norm. Monsters represent the ideas of our society that we are fearful to contemplate further into that it is something outside of our nature. Monsters cause us to contemplate a societal perspective that we wouldn't ordinarily think as our own. Monsters challenge our basic perspective and encourage us to think deeper into the common themes of our society. Finally, Monsters incite