We are called here today to discuss a trial questioning our understanding of justice. As you are aware, a tragic event occurred on the night of October 31st here in Maycomb County. This case involves twelve and eight-year-old Jeremy and Jean Louise Finch, who were walking home that night when they were followed and violently attacked by Robert Ewell. In the midst of this, Mr. Ewell is consequently killed with his own knife. Neighbor Mr. Arthur Radley, subsequently found guilty of being the one who killed Mr. Ewell, saved the children’s lives and carried Jem home. Although evidence shows Arthur killed Mr. Ewell, one must look past the surface and recognize his intentions. Killing Mr. Ewell does not make Arthur Radley a criminal, but rather a victim of misunderstanding in Court. A reclusive, innocuous man of Maycomb was brought to negative attention for his spontaneous act of defense, courage, and selflessness, as he prevented injustice by saving two children. Ms. Finch, a primary witness at the scene, argues how punishing Arthur is like “shootin’ a mockingbird.” Arthur did nothing but keep the peace, therefore punishment would be a sin. Furthermore, law enforcer Sheriff Heck Tate …show more content…
He “saw trouble coming and couldn’t stand to watch those children get harmed,” wanting to save them before it was too late. He then “ran towards the scene, only intending to harm the man if he posed a threat to the children,” Mr Radley explained. Any sane person about to witness a murder of a child would have the same instinct to step in and stop it if the opportunity presented itself. Those with children, especially, know they would even sacrifice anything to save their kids in this situation. Yet, seeing it from this new perspective requires putting aside preconceptions, and replacing them with compassion and understanding; two additional things needed when dealing with a case like