Execution of Justice by Emily Mann used media and stage angles to make us feel we were directly witnessing the evidence and events as a contemporary citizen within the docudrama. Before seeing Execution of Justice, I subconsciously labelled the Moscone-Milk assassinations as a hate crime, but the performance thrust me into a world where my perspective started from square one. Consequently, as I was watching I was completely torn between condemning Dan White’s horrid crime as one of ignorant passion or cold-hearted prejudice. The beginning starts with a shoddy but homely film of Dan and his wife being a picture-perfect couple. This paints a charming portrait of Dan and his family, conveying how people thought of him and kicking off the process …show more content…
But unlike the jury, we see the examiners too. Alone, this video might not sway some to sympathize with Dan’s, but the compassionate pity from his questioners finished the job. We can hear and see them genuinely trust Dan pleading that he was in an ignorant state of mind, and that helps us believe him too. During the trial, we were forced to be deliberators. The prosecution and defense had tables and body language almost completely directed at us, as if we were the jury instead of the actors behind the lawyers on stage. Core witness testimonies were our main dish, placed in the middle-front of stage. But we had various ancillary first-hand accounts to chew on, and these testimonies were done on the left and right of the audience, in the back corners of stage, or other places that made them seem like small but unavoidable bits of information in our head. There were segments that split the enormous centerpiece in two, opening the doors to a different scene. Harvey’s political speech was an important one; inspirational music and patriotic images made me feel almost as excited as his supporters. Later, images of candles and sorrowful music made me feel the heartbreak of San Francisco’s homosexuals. Segments like these were balanced, not giving us the satisfaction of leaning one way and helping us ascertain the nature of Dan’s
Taste, which is, after all, the insecurity of the middle class, became the homosexual's licentiate to challenge the rule of nature,” (Rodriguez 124). This stereotype communicates to the general public that homosexuality or the ones that fall in the boxes of LGBTQ (and more) are the individuals that have taste in fashion, makeup, food, home decor, etc., also even by claiming to be something out of heterosexuality disrupted the laws of nature which is smart for Rodriguez to input in Late Victorians. In addition, the use of symbolism in Rodriguez’s essay regarding homosexuality is portrayed as a home. The Victorian houses that were built for middle-class individuals, which were being claimed by homosexual men to live in, marry, or start a family in, in San Francisco. The portrayal of home as a place of comfort, safety, and family were things that homosexual men (or women), and anything in between craved for in mortality like heterosexual beings. Apart from the symbolism, I noticed that Rodriguez liked metaphors, anaphora, hyperbole, and repetition in his
Murder on a Sunday morning is a documentary of an unfortunate mishap with the legal justice system that happens one of many times. In Jacksonville, Florida the year of 2001, May 8th there was a horrific scenery at Ramada hotel. A women named Mary Ann Stevens and her husband were tourists, while leaving their room early Sunday morning around 9AM a gunshot fatally killed Mary Ann and ended the couple’s vacation. When cops arrived at the scene and investigated they took notes on what the suspect looked like from the husband, “ The suspect is skinny black male dark shorts unknown shirt on foot running south bound…. Fishlike hat on.”- cop at the scene. When the cops were driving around they’ve spotted an African American
In his work about gay life in New York City, George Chauncey seeks to dispel the various myths about the gay lifestyle before the Civil Rights era of the 60’s. He distills the misconceptions into three major myths: “…isolation, invisibility, and internalization” (Chauncey 1994, 2). He believes a certain image has taken in the public mind where gays did not openly exist until the 60’s, and that professional historians have largely ignored this era of sexual history. He posits such ideas are simply counterfactual. Using the city of New York, a metropolitan landscape where many types of people confluence together, he details a thriving gay community. Certainly it is a community by Chauncey’s reckoning; he shows gay men had a large network of bar, clubs, and various other cultural venues where not only gay men intermingled the larger public did as well. This dispels the first two principle myths that gay men were isolated internally from other gay men or invisible to the populace. As to the internalization of gay men, they were not by any degree self-loathing. In fact, Chauncey shows examples of gay pride such a drag queen arrested and detained in police car in a photo with a big smile (Chauncey 1994, 330). Using a series of personal interviews, primary archival material from city repositories, articles, police reports, and private watchdog groups, Chauncey details with a preponderance of evidence the existence of a gay culture in New York City, while at the same time using secondary scholarship to give context to larger events like the Depression and thereby tie changes to the gay community to larger changes in the society.
Even before the jury sits to take an initial vote, the third man has found something to complain about. Describing “the way these lawyers can talk, and talk and talk, even when the case is as obvious as this” one was. Then, without discussing any of the facts presented in court, three immediately voiced his opinion that the boy is guilty. It is like this with juror number three quite often, jumping to conclusions without any kind of proof. When the idea that the murder weapon, a unique switchblade knife, is not the only one of its kind, three expresses “[that] it’s not possible!” Juror eight, on the other hand, is a man who takes a much more patient approach to the task of dictating which path the defendant's life takes. The actions of juror three are antagonistic to juror eight as he tries people to take time and look at the evidence. During any discussion, juror number three sided with those who shared his opinion and was put off by anyone who sided with “this golden-voiced little preacher over here,” juror eight. His superior attitude was an influence on his ability to admit when the jury’s argument was weak. Even when a fellow juror had provided a reasonable doubt for evidence to implicate the young defendant, three was the last one to let the argument go. Ironically, the play ends with a 180 turn from where it began; with juror three
As one of the seven jury deliberations documented and recorded in the ABC News television series In the Jury Room the discussions of the jurors were able to be seen throughout the United States. A transcript was also created by ABC News for the public as well. The emotions and interactions of the jurors were now capable of being portrayed to anyone interested in the interworkings of jury deliberations. The first task,...
Yet with the help of one aged yet wise and optimistic man he speaks his opinion, one that starts to not change however open the minds of the other eleven men on the jury. By doing this the man puts out a visual picture by verbally expressing the facts discussed during the trial, he uses props from the room and other items the he himself brought with him during the course of the trial. Once expressed the gentleman essentially demonstrate that perhaps this young man on trial May or may not be guilty. Which goes to show the lack of research, and misused information that was used in the benefit of the prosecution. For example when a certain factor was brought upon the trail; that being timing, whether or not it took the neighbor 15 seconds to run from his chair all the way to the door. By proving this right or wrong this man Juror #4 put on a demonstration, but first he made sure his notes were correct with the other 11 jurors. After it was
homosexual liberation. Some have demonstrated their anger and concerns about prejudice against homosexuals in both riots and artistic forms. Therefore, these people seek to prove to the heterosexual world that homosexual ‘deviancy’ was a myth.
The play, ‘Twelve Angry men’, written by Reginald Rose, explores the thrilling story of how twelve different orientated jurors express their perceptions towards a delinquent crime, allegedly committed by a black, sixteen-year-old. Throughout the duration of the play, we witness how the juror’s background ordeals and presumptuous assumptions influence the way they conceptualise the whole testimony itself.
There are three types of Justice discussed in Book 1 of Plato’s Republic which are Retributive, Procedural, and Social Justice. Retributive justice is the type of justice that requires someone to pay back their debts if they took something. According to Cephalus, justice requires ‘repayment’ from those who have taken something. For example, The death penalty can be considered retributive justice because someone may have took a life and now their life will be taken from them in return. Procedural justice is doing good for someone that you are close with but doing harm to someone you do not get along with. Polemarchus believes that justice is doing good to good people and doing bad to bad people. For example, Giving your friend a ride to
Guilty or not guilty? This the key question during the murder trial of a young man accused of fatally stabbing his father. The play 12 Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, introduces to the audience twelve members of a jury made up of contrasting men from various backgrounds. One of the most critical elements of the play is how the personalities and experiences of these men influence their initial majority vote of guilty. Three of the most influential members include juror #3, juror #10, and juror #11. Their past experiences and personal bias determine their thoughts and opinions on the case. Therefore, how a person feels inside is reflected in his/her thoughts, opinions, and behavior.
The death penalty has been part of the American judicial system since the country’s founding [1]. Most people see the death penalty as the fairest way to punish those who have killed, because, in the words of Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, “the instinct for retribution is part of the nature of man.” I do agree that the deliverance of justice is an important factor in any public policy. However, it is also important to consider the more pragmatic aspects, like the cost to the state. It is possible that the financial cost could be outweighed by the societal benefit. However, upon researching the death penalty, one would discover that the cost of capital punishment is unreasonably high, particularly in the state of California, especially when we consider how rarely the death sentence is actually implemented. In times like these, times of economic turmoil and scarce financial resources, the state cannot afford a system that is so expensive and also so rarely utilized. I believe that, in the state of California, the death penalty is overly expensive and so rarely implemented that it should be abolished.
How could she, his wife, betray him and kill him with no remorse? The article, “Trial Lawyers Cater to Jurors’ Demands for Visual Evidence,” written by Sylvia Hsieh, stresses the importance of visual evidence. Hsieh writes in a formal tone as she delves into a pool of various example trials used to explain visual evidence, along with specific quotes obtained from well-known lawyers and workers in the industry. This simply states the recurring idea that visual evidence is important.
“A Death in Texas” by Steve Earle is the true-life story of a friendship that occurred over ten
Capital offenses are crimes against the State or the Country. These crimes are not limited to death of one victim, but also include treason, espionage, genocide, and terrorism that result in death. Capital offenses vary on the state and federal level. State offenses that result in the death penalty are homicide cases with an average of 10 aggravating factors, and in some cases the aggravated sexual assault of a minor especially under 13. This was debated as being unconstitutional under the decision handed down by the Supreme Court in the case of Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008). The Supreme Court ruled that in this specific case where the aggravated rape of minor did not result in death, it was
... believed in the innocence of the young man and convinced the others to view the evidence and examine the true events that occurred. He struggled with the other jurors because he became the deviant one in the group, not willing to follow along with the rest. His reasoning and his need to examine things prevailed because one by one, the jurors started to see his perspective and they voted not guilty. Some jurors were not convinced, no matter how much evidence was there, especially Juror #3. His issues with his son affected his decision-making but in the end, he only examined the evidence and concluded that the young man was not guilty.