Steve Harmon Is Not Guilty In Monster By Walter Dean Meyers

783 Words4 Pages

When on trial for a serious crime or felony, there are multiple things at stake; the person’s life, reputation, freedom, and, possibly, his or her own morality. If that person is found guilty, then they will receive a selected amount of time in jail or prison. However, if found not guilty than all charges will be dropped. It is quite clear that if someone’s life of freedom was at risk, then that person would do anything to convince the jury that he or she is not guilty. They possibly even lie under oath. Steve Harmon is one who had done this in order to get his life back. The book Monster by Walter Dean Meyers ends with this young man found not guilty; even though he had been involved in a theft that ended up becoming a murder. Though finding him not guilty was the wrong conclusion, and that is not what Steve Harmon should have received, there was too much of a reasonable doubt to find him guilty. …show more content…

Take the flashback scene found on pages 149-151. It shows Steve having a conversation with James King about the robbery. Here in this scene King is trying to convince Steve into helping with the robbery. However, from pages 223-234, he never mentions that he and King have this conversation even though he promised to testify the truth about his relationship with King. Although this example doesn’t provide enough evidence to Steve being guilty, it does show he was perjuring. If one of the other persons testified against Steve and told the judge that he had talked to King and could somehow provide enough proof, he could be found guilty of perjury. But that’s beside the