ipl-logo

Rhetorical Analysis Of Monster 'By Kathy O' Brien

666 Words3 Pages

In Monster, by Walter Dean Meyers, Kathy O'Brien must get Steve Harmon ready for trial - who is being accused of felony murder. O’Brien has to find a way to make her client presentable to the jury while also preparing him for his testimony. K. Nichole Nesbitt is an attorney that explains what lawyers should be doing for their clients in the process. Nesbitt goes into detail about how ethical lawyers should be reviewing a client's legal rights and examining their responses. While then goes on about how an unethical lawyer cannot advise a client to lie or mislead the jury in any way. When considering Nesbitt’s article, O’Brien’s preparations are ethical because they encourage Steve to be truthful.
Nesbitt recognizes the roles a lawyer must play. First, she discusses how an attorney is strongly …show more content…

First, O’Brien persuades Steve into believing in himself. O'Brien states, “I think they want to hear your side of the story.”(215) She wants Steve to have the upper hand. He needs to put his side of the situation out there and make his face known. O’Brien is ethical because she is instructing Steve to tell the truth and put himself forth. Next, She advises Steve to be presentable in front of the jury. O’Brien advises, “Present yourself as someone the jurors can believe in.”(216) Steve is being told more about the case and what is to come. If he puts his story out there, the jury will see differently. O’Brien is giving good legal advice to him, showing she is ethical. Lastly, O'Brien is encouraging steve to be honest while proving his innocence on trial. Steve answers, “Last summer?” O’brien shows whether she likes or dislikes some of his answers to get him ready. She encourages him to change his answer to be in his favor. Obrien is preparing Steve and encouraging him for his testimony. O’Brien is an ethical lawyer because she prepares, helps, and gives the advice to steve so he doesn't go on stand

Show More
Related
563 Words | 3 Pages

Nevertheless, did Terry Malloy think ethically and create the moral decision to testify to the crime commission and inform them about the fraudulent exercises? According to Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, philosophers created

Read More
226 Words | 1 Pages

His defendant Kathy O’brien may have supported him through the trial, but she did believe he was the Monster Sandra Petrocelli made him and Steve King out to be. This proves that opinions do not always change because of results. More so towards the end it shows how O’brien still believes he is wrong and she still sees him as guilty. To begin, on page 13 Harmon asked

Read More
491 Words | 2 Pages

Steve is questioning his own innocence on whether he was involved in the robbery. He first, lies under oath, saying he wasn’t at the store and later writes in his journal that he was, “in to get some mints and back out”. On page 203, Steve, (writing in his journal), states, “we all lie to ourselves here” meaning he subconsciously wants to believe he is innocent. Steve does admit that King and Bobo asked him to check the place out, but he never gives them a signal. Steve is trying to justify his actions but is having second thoughts on whether he participated in the robbery.

Read More
790 Words | 4 Pages

This is proved when Mr. Sawicki testifies. In the novel Mr. Sawicki testifies stating, “‘He’s very much involved with depicting his neighborhood and environment in a positive manner.’” (Myers 235). Throughout the novel there weren't a lot of people that testified about Steve. In fact, there were probably only three people.

Read More
314 Words | 2 Pages

First of all, Steve was not the lookout because he never confessed to it. For instance, when O’Brien asked Stever if he was a part of the robbery, Stever answers, I know I wasn't in the drugstore on page 229. He is also under oath. So why would he lie to the judge if he doesn’t want to go the jail? So that's a way to prove he is innocent.

Read More
487 Words | 2 Pages

Lincoln was practicing in a court of law; he was not trying to convince a group of individuals of Truett’s innocence at a local pub. Emotion alone, while helpful in the courtroom in some regards such as closing and opening statements and proving certain elements such a genuine fear of loss of life, possibly would not have handed Lincoln a victory. His ability to “zealously represent” his client was due to his preparation long before he stepped into a courtroom. A large part of this preparation is the construction of elements taught in this class: case briefs and legal memorandums. These devices help an attorney understand the interconnected fibers between statutes and common law as they apply to a case at hand.

Read More
876 Words | 4 Pages

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.

Read More
798 Words | 4 Pages

Also paragraph (1) of this rule states “the lawyer reasonably believes that the lawyer will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client” (Del. Pg. 7). A specific event that this rule applies to in the movie would be the fact that simply Vinny cannot truthfully believe that he can represent both clients with “competent and diligent representation.” This is because this is his first true trial case. He lacks both knowledge as well as experience. Another key issue in this movie that goes along with Rule 1.7 is truly the fact of conflict of interest between Billy

Read More
983 Words | 4 Pages

Steve was a Monster because He lied and doubted himself. During the quote, Steve

Read More
548 Words | 3 Pages

However, this story of Mrs. Stephens being helpless is all the defense has. But how can you, the jury, believe a story from a woman that would lie to doctors, to police,

Read More
879 Words | 4 Pages

As Steve attempts his defense, struggling with his innocence, he creates an excuse to save himself and to prove that he is innocent. However, he writes as if he knows he is guilty, but wants to cut himself some slack. Steve uses rhetorical questions to imply that he knows what he did wrong, but does not want to admit to the crime. He writes his part in the crime casually, which further conveys the conflict in his mind. He depends on others to bring clarity to his mind, such as saying, “What did I do?”.

Read More
779 Words | 4 Pages

As he works on a case he invests his time and effort into finding what a justifiable and truthful. But, with working in his field come risks especially when it meant defending someone who others think the death penalty is a justifiable way of

Read More
885 Words | 4 Pages

Although it mostly deals with the court and how they bring many witnesses and hear their stories toward the crime. The witneses' stories helps Steve's lawyer O' Brien find clues in which Steve is Innocent as well as trying to find clues in Steve personality when he doubts him at first toward commiting the crime. Also Steve talks about how he misses his family and has flashbacks to how he ended up in this

Read More
1002 Words | 5 Pages

He depends on others to bring clarity to his mind, such as saying, “What did I do?”. After the session at court was finished, Steve was insecure about what Ms. O’Brien, his lawyer, thinks of him. He writes an entry about it: “Who was Steve Harmon? I wanted to open my shirt and tell her to look into my heart to see who I was, who the real Steve Harmon”(92). During the trial, Ms. O’Brien stays distant from him.

Read More
1122 Words | 5 Pages

Paul, the evidence from the DA’s office, the doctors, members of the Children's Institute International (CII) and clients. He had to work together with them to defend his case. This was shown when a plea bargain was offered to Ms. MaMartin. 2. How significant was discretion with respect to the defense attorney?

Read More

More about Rhetorical Analysis Of Monster 'By Kathy O' Brien

Related Topics

Open Document