The murder of Harvey Groves in A Jury Case
The idea, you understand, is that two men have crept up to the lonely little mountain house in the late afternoon, George Small creeping ahead with the heavily loaded shot-gun in his hands, really being driven forward by Cal Long, creeping at his heels, a man, Luther explains, simply too strong for him, and that, at the fatal moment, when they faced Harvey Groves, and I presume had to shoot or be shot, and George weakened, Cal Long just touched George on the shoulder. The touch, you see, according to Luther's notion, was a command It said, "Shoot!" and George's body stiffened, and he shot. (4)
In this passage, the narrator reports--based on Luther's account--what he thinks happened the night George and Cal went to Harvey's house to get revenge on George in Sherwood Anderson's "A Jury Case." At first glance, the reader can easily believe this somewhat interesting, plausible scenario. However, if we analyze the details and "known" facts in the events surrounding the killing of Harvey Groves, we realize that this passage constitutes a "loose" interpretation grounded in a misconception of George. Put simply, there is evidence to suggest that Luther fabricates this scenario to showcase his storytelling abilities.
First, let's examine the facts of this "case." But what, you might wonder, qualifies as a provable fact? For this story, we will assume that any claim made by the narrator that could be backed up by an eye-witness is true. Thus, we know that when Cal enters George's house the night of the murder, George's wife, also in the house, observes them as they drink whiskey. She sees George swell into anger and break two chairs. She also views George as he grabs his shotgun and heads off to Harvey's with Cal. Consequently, in the next few days, she, an eyewitness to the events in her home, goes around, "telling every one that her husband and Cal Long were going to kill someone" (5). Moreover, we know that Harvey Groves is in fact murdered--since his body is found by someone--however, we don't know much about the occurrence of his murder since no outside witness observes the murder--unless, of course, the observer is involved in the murder.
On the evening of Ms. Heggar¡¦s death she was alone in her house. Eddie Ray Branch, her grandson, testified that he visited his grandmother on the day that she was killed. He was there till at least 6:30 p.m. Lester Busby, her grandnephew, and David Hicks arrived while her grandson was still there and they saw him leave. They then went in to visit with Ms. Heggar. While they were there, Lester repaid Ms. Heggar 80 dollars, which he owed her. They left around 7:15 p.m. and went next door to a neighboring friend¡¦s house. David Hick¡¦s went home alone from there to get something but returned within ten minutes of leaving. Because he was only gone for 5-10 minutes, prosecution theorized TWO attacks on Ms. Heggar because he could not have killed his grandmother during this 5-10 minute period alone. At 7:30 p.m., 15 minutes after the two had left, an insurance salesman called to see Ms. Heggar. He knocked for about 2 or 3 minutes and got no reply. Her door was open but the screen door was closed. Her TV was on. He claimed to have left after about 5 minutes and then he returned the next morning. The circumstances were exactly the same. With concern, he went to the neighbor¡¦s house and called the police. His reasoning for being there was because the grandmother¡¦s family had taken out burial insurance three days before she had died.
The very first sentence goes right into the speech with no holding back and it lays out the thesis tha...
Not guilty was the decision made by the jury during the George Zimmerman vs. Trayvon Martin trial. That verdict may have been the most controversial one of recent time. Many people were upset by the decision and felt that justice was not achieved for the young victim, Martin who was seventeen years old when he was killed. This incident seems to be a tragic example of stereotyping and racial profiling. It is also an example of how a verdict, based on the strict interpretation of the law can be the wrong verdict.
a. Victor Burnette lived in Richmond, Virginia in 1979. He cared for his blind and arthritic grandmother at night and was getting ready to get his career started. However this all change on the 5th of August that year, when a local woman identified him as the man who raped her. When DNA testing was done in 2009 it confirmed that he was not the attacker. It had taken 20 years for Burnette to clear his name. [Exoneration Case Detail. 2014]
The book Murder in the Bayou: Who Killed the Women Known as the Jeff Davis 8?, written by independent journalist and private investigator Ethan Brown, tells the horrific true story of the bayou town of Jennings, Louisiana located in the heart of the Jefferson Davis parish. During the four year duration between 2005 and 2009, the town of Jennings was on edge after the discovery of the bodies of eight murdered women were found in the filthy canals and swamps. The victims became known as the “Jeff Davis 8.” For years, local law enforcement suspected a serial killer, and solely investigated the murders based on that theory alone. The victims were murdered in varying manors, but when alive they all shared many commonalities and were connected to
The movie Runaway Jury starts with a shooting in a business office. The movie then continues to people receiving jury summons and people taking pictures of them. It goes on to show Rankin Fitch and the defense committing electronic surveillance during the jury selections. This movie shows how Fitch and the defense attempt to influence the jury to vote for the defense. The movie continuously shows a person by the name of “Marlee” who talks to Fitch and Rohr trying to persuade them to pay her in order for the jury to be “swayed” their way. “Marlee” is Nick Easter’s girlfriend. As the movie progresses, the viewer realizes that Nick was pretended to get avoid jury duty in order to secure a spot in the jury. The movie ends with the jury voting against the gun company and then Nick and “Marlee” blackmailing Fitch with a receipt for $15 million and they demand that he retire immediately. They inform him that the $15 million will benefit the shooting victims in the town of Gardner.
One of the most intense group task experiences in the United States is that of serving on the jury of a death penalty case. This forces a group of complete strangers to come together and determine the fate of another’s human beings life. The court case of the State of Ohio v Mark Ducic, was of no exception. Ducic a 47 year old drug addict white male, was accused of committing a double homicide. In accordance with Ohio state law, murdering more than one individual is considered a mass murder and therefore the accused is subject to the possibility of the death penalty. Ducic’s victims included Barbara Davis, his domestic partner and drug addict, as well as a drug user that Ducic was an acquaintance with. The death of Davis was at first believed to be due to an overdose, but police informants identified Ducic’s voice on a recording claiming that he killed her. The other victim, the drug addict, was thought to be eliminated by Ducic for fear that he would inform the police that he killed Davis. Investigators believed that Ducic gave both victims a deathly amount of drugs that would make it appear as though they both simply overdosed. Ducic was found guilty on both occasions, yet a second trial in regards to his sentencing had to occur and another hearing had to be conducted on whether or not to remove the death penalty.
"I see a perfect explosion, God's ammunition dump, going up in flames of righteousness, Satan storming heaven, his artillery captain, a fiercely grinning fool with red flayed cheeks, Damien by name, never to be Michael Hutchison again. The end is near. Kiss your ass goodbye people, it's time to pay up. Now is the judgment. I am the judge."-Damien Echols, (West Memphis Three Facts). The West memphis three is considered one of the most unfair trials in US history. On May fifth, three eight year old boys came up missing from their West Memphis, Arkansas homes. The next day, they were found brutally murdered in which appeared to be the attempts of a Satanic ritual. This lead to an opinion that only Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin, and Jesse Misskelley, due to the assumption, the investigators of this case, caused Jesse Misskelley to have a nervous breakdown caused by his unrecognized mental retardation, which forced a confession out of him. When word got out on this case, celebrities backed up the belief that the three boys were innocent and were giving an unfair trial.
Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich sued for billions in bitter “fraud and blackmail” battle with former business partner ] mail online(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article 560523/chelsea-owner-Roman-abramovich-sued-billions-bitter-fraud-blackmail-battle-business-partner,html)
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.
...ences attitudes and behaviors. There is almost an even split between studies that music has antisocial effects and studies that suggest that the effects are minor or nonexistent. Tatum suggests that extensive research must be conducted before casual inferences are made.
Early in his career, Drummond defended two teenage child murderers and helped them escape their consequences. Due to this act, he entered Dayton surrounded by strong feelings of hatred. After his scientists were refused a spot on the stand, Drummond was enraged. Henry decided to put Matthew Harrison Brady on the stand to question him. “I call to the stand one of the world’s foremost experts on the Bible and its teachings – Matthew Harrison Brady” he insisted (Lawrence and Lee 82). After Cate’s verdict was announced, Drummond appealed it, causing it to be sent to a higher court. All these actions resemble the same activities of Clarence Darrow during the Scopes Trial. Clarence Darrow was frowned upon because of his success while taking on the teenage murderer’s situation. When he put William Jennings Bryan on stand, the crowd was shocked by his unorthodox action, but he knew exactly what he was doing. “On the seventh day of the trial, on a platform outside the Dayton, Tennessee courthouse, he called William Jennings Bryan to the stand as an expert on the Bible” (“People & Events” 1). His plan worked, allowing him to reduce the sentence to a reasonable consequence, but he was still unhappy about the verdict. He requested that the case be taken to a higher court in hopes of reversing the outcome. All in all, Henry’s actions are a near mirror image of Clarence’s.
Many times, when we see a person for the first time, we automatically judge them, whether we realize it or not. In Pride and Prejudice, this is exactly the situation between the two main characters. Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy have very different families, lifestyles, and attitudes. They both formulated their opinions of each other rather quickly and this really hindered the beginning of their relationship. In our lives this happens many times as we judge first without even getting to know the person. Luckily for Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy, even though they despised each other, time eventually changed their minds and hearts, resulting in an unimaginable love story.
There are those of us who pride ourselves in the ability to get along with others, we’re socially adjusted and anger doesn’t seem to play a very large role in our lives. We don’t think of ourselves as someone who points the finger, but at some point, we’re all guilty. I know I am. I get annoyed with people who are inconsiderate, but I’m often inconsiderate myself. “Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves…these projections both insulate and cripple individuals by forming a thick fog of illusion between the ego and the real world…these feelings can be valuable clues that can lead to a greater understanding of ourselves.” – Carl Jung. A person cannot learn from their mistakes if their mental patterns are geared towards not accepting responsibility.
Public speaking goes beyond giving an oral presentation before a bunch of people who are listening to you. A good public speaker is one who can successfully deliver a speech to the intended audience, drive the message home and even get positive feedback from an audience. Through observing the required styles, one can state that their speech was effective and impactful. A good public speaker seeks to move the audience into action, gives the right facial expressing based on the occasion and makes required pauses to place emphasis on his/her speech. Being an active public speaker requires one to possess various qualities that are essential to the speaker and to the audience at hand. One can be able to judge whether a speaker is