Julie Pawloski Mr. Leavitt Ela 1 May 12, 2023 Why Steve Is Innocent I am writing this to prove why the Judge and juries from Monster by Walter Dean Myers were correct in their final judgment saying Steve was innocent. As for him , he had a lot of evidence proving he was innocent. For example. Lorelle Henry, the key witness , never saw and never heard Steve in the store while she was there. Another piece of evidence is that after the homicide Steve was never compensated by money, which was promised by Mr. King and “Bobo” which they had stolen from the store. Although you might wonder why I mentioned the money saying he might have participated, the main reason they committed the crime was for money. So why did Steve not get paid? I am writing this essay to prove that Steve correctly proved his innocence to the judge and juries. The first major evidence is that Lorelle Henry did not witness Steve in the store while she was there. While Lorelle Henry was in the store, she only heard two young men …show more content…
This was never fully proven, yet King says “I need to get paid, man. I ain’t got nothing between my butt and the ground but a rag” (Myers 50). Steve responds with “I hear that” (Myers 50). This shows the reader that they both needed money and were willing to do something for money. This proves that if Steve participated in the robbery, he would have been compensated, but he never was. Another reason that proves that Steve was never compensated was “Bobo” Evans tells the judge that he and King went to go to get food after the crime because they were hungry. This is said by “Bobo” proving where they went, “Then we went down to the chicken joint over Lenox Avenue, across from the bridge” (Myers 180). This proves that they never went to Steve to give him money after they left the store. We also know that Steve did not come with them or ever meet up for the money by “Bobo” saying “Just me and King” (Myers