Sir, I know Capitan Preston intimately. I can promise you he would not do such a thing. As God, my witness Capitan Preston is not guilty of murder.” Later, it quotes that Adams was mad that no other lawyers where going to take the case but he was delighted to help Preston by
Thirdly, Sandra Petrocelli, argumentative and persuasive, contended that it’s not about the character of a person, but about an innocent Alguinaldo Nesbitt, dead and disheveled, wishing he was alive. Petrocelli uses Mr. Evans’ testimony as her main evidence throughout her argument. “He also places Mr. King in the drugstore with him on the 22nd of December.” Smoothly squeezing a scenario, Petrocelli attempts to win over the jury. “Perhaps, in some strange way, [Steve Harmon] can even say, as his attorney has suggested, that because he did not give a thumbs-up signal, or some sign to that effect,
In his urgency to argue how important he is, Stoll takes it upon himself to redeem Adams in every possible way. In doing this, Stoll does not fully acknowledge accusations of Adams’s roles in inciting mob violence and manipulating the masses with false propaganda. There has always been debate on Samuel Adams’s character and intentions, and Stoll consistently asserts that Samuel Adams is more innocent than guilty. While Stoll is effective in prompting a newfound sense
at 4) Mr. Stringfellow initially stated that he had not, however, during the same proceedings, Mr. Stringfellow recanted his initial declarations about not having communication with his father. (Id. at 4,6.) Mr. Stringfellow admitted to speaking with his father a few weeks prior during a brief phone call in which he requested the contact information of Mr.Stringfellow’s mother, Mr. Stringfellow refused the request of Mr. Townsend then causing him to become furious hurling insults at Mr. Stringfellow. (Id. at 6.) Mr. Townsend had briefly mentioned the pending charges against him during this call stating that “they were trumped up and he had just been doing ‘research’ for a book he was thinking of writing”.
Being stripped of pride has the power to destroy us all. John Hale in the story of the Crucible is described at first as an “eager-eyed intellectual” (33) who is immensely proud of his knowledge and expertise in the art of witchcraft. He is the major force behind witch trials at first, however, over the course of the play, he undergoes a transformation. John begins to realize that it is the court’s pride in its “noble cause” that corrupts itself and blinds it from the truth of the matter. When Hale starts listening to the testimony of John Proctor, he begins to oppose the unfair trials of innocents.
However, as he discovers more about the accused themselves, Hale begins to doubt his initial judgment, and questions the competency of the court in honestly assessing the witch trials. Yet, in fear of choosing a side, Hale becomes tactfully neutral and desperate for the truth, as he advocates for “proof so immaculate” that the verdict would be just and indelible (188). His logical and analytical nature lends him towards Proctor’s argument, but he is compelled to stay firm with the law, especially as Danforth and Parris challenge his loyalty throughout the case. During the trials, the Reverend experiences a foreboding guilt for the first time, as he recognizes his culpability in the lives that he may have incorrectly denounced. Although he has the power to defend his conscience, his religious duty and responsibilities towards the court
Characteristically articulate speech and well-informed decisions seem to be traits that are naturally instilled in political authorities. This pre-existing idea of formidable ambience becomes a background to every word they say, and as shown in literature such as The Crucible, is used as evidence to support any point made. Judge Danforth, one of the presiding judges during the Salem Witch Trials, uses his political status as justification to the credibility of his decisions. He makes it seem as though his ruling and knowledge is better than others’ through indirectly citing his political status, thereby gaining power over all others in the room. The diction which he uses, concise and succinct leaves little room for argument, and presents everything he says as though it is truth.
He feared public mistrust over his key witness fleeing the town, then when asked if they should put the executions on hold, he considers his own image instead of the credibility of his sentences. “Postponement now speaks a floundering on my part; reprieve or pardon must cast doubt upon the guilt of them that died till now. ”(Miller IV.129) He fails to serve the true purpose of a judge; to provide an objective view based on a variety of evidence to administer justice. His need to be right and to be corroborated by the people beneath him becomes most evident when faced with those refusing to confess to crimes they did not commit.
The reader’s understanding of the story is distorted because the narrator is mad and unreliable. Phillips’s version of a situation is a bit childish as he thinks nobody is on his side. However, Mrs. Narwin’s version of the same situation is completely different, “Yet I’ve been blamed for his suspension… I’m home—surrounded by letters, and telegrams too— from people, perfect strangers who know nothing about me, who hate me” (Nothing But the Truth, Chapter 17). Philip believes that he deserves justice, but he is not getting any, and that nobody agrees with him.
During the Salem Witch Trials, having a “good” reputation could save one’s family or even their life, yet a “good” reputation could not avert suspicion if accused of witchcraft, a fact proved by Miller’s characters, Rebecca Nurse and John Proctor. Wife of Francis Nurse, Rebecca was highly respected by her community due to her charity and dedication to those around her, but when Mrs. Ann Putnam accuses Rebecca of witchcraft and Rebecca refuses to admit that she is a witch, nearly everyone is convinced that Rebecca is a witch except John Proctor. Determined to prove that those accusing others of witchcraft are hypocrites, Proctor has to choose whether or not to save himself but convict others or face inevitable death and attempt to save others, proving that it can be dangerous to heedlessly mimic society. At the end of the novel, Proctor chooses to follow his conscience instead of choosing to belong. Although one might belong in society or in a certain group, the “rules of belonging” often shift, requiring complete compliance with the new rules or the leader’s wishes to truly belong.
Charles Pierce in his essay ," Ho to Make our Ideas Clear",stated that logicians were obscure in describing their ideas and conceptions, and at the same time confusing and in need of clarification, he regarded said philosophies used by logicians extinct. He viewed Descartes reconstruction of philosophy which would attempt to discard the traditional method of philosophy as one that failed in being clear," The distinction between an idea seeming clear and really being so never occurred to him." Ultimately, Charles Pierce promoted a logic that would teach us in attaining clear ideas, as well as a different approach on finding what is to be the truth. Charles also spoke about Doubt, Belief and thought. Doubt would brings about thought which
The idea of being well-known in historical events is appetizing to many people, Edward Pierce among them. Pierce, however, differed from this common goal alone, for he desired to not only be known for committing a dastardly crime, but for having a hidden motive for his actions. Pierce’s quiet charm (laced with greed) and remarkable wit played a part in achieving what would be known as one of the greatest crimes of all time – robbing a train and having an enigmatic presence following the crime. A charming personality can allow even the worst of people to go great distances in life.
Exploitation and intimidation of others to achieve personal goals is considered greed and inhuman acts. All the characters in the novel American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis, demonstrate the theme of greed at one point. The constant desires for money and power are shown through Patrick Bateman’s power dominance of women during sexual intercourse. Although he paid the women money, but he forced them to the point that it is abuse. This greed is especially shown as he is trying obtain power through his rape of women.
However, his true morals are revealed when the narrator shows signs of guilt like “My head ached, and I fancied a ringing in my ears.” The narrator’s transition from superiority to guilt represents the reality that the acknowledgement of wrongdoings can either be done consciously or unconsciously, and that the latter has considerable negative
All characters are accused and redeemed of guilt but the murderer is still elusive. Much to the shock of the readers of detective fiction of that time, it turns out that the murderer is the Watson figure, and the narrator, the one person on whose first-person account the reader 's’ entire access to all events depends -- Dr. Sheppard. In a novel that reiterates the significance of confession to unearth the truth, Christie throws the veracity of all confessions contained therein in danger by depicting how easily the readers can be taken in by
