Summary Of Walter Dean Myers 'Monster'

A criminal trial shows the prejudicial aspects within the justice system, and the trial calls for the attorneys to convince the jury of guilty or not guilty. Monster, written by Walter Dean Myers, takes place within a jail and courtroom. The trial is about the brutal murder of Alguinaldo Nesbitt, the store owner, who was also robbed of five cartons of cigarettes. James King and Steve Harmon are the teenagers on trial. In the end, both could be convicted of felony murder. However, the attorneys have to convince the jury that their client is not guilty or guilty. By analyzing each attorney's closing argument, it is clear that Kathy O’Brien provided the most convincing argument.

Firstly, Asa Briggs, defense attorney for James King, enlightened

If you believe, as I do, that their positions, their stated characters, so taint their testimony that everything they say is well within the area of reasonable doubt.” Hence, Briggs breaks down the whole trial into which testimonies are viable. Only one was reasonable, and it was the witness testimony of Miss Henry. Miss Henry was in the store to get medicine for her granddaughter, but she picked James King out of a handful of photographs—not even fifty or a thousand pictures. Briggs inferred that she, Miss Henry, was partially coerced to pick the man looking most similar in countenance to King out of little to no photographs. Overall, Briggs’ closing argument was plausible, but it resulted in King being convicted of felony murder. Secondly, cogent Kathy O’Brien, compassionate and analytical, argued in court over the States’ testimonies and was the only witness presented by the State. O’Brien contradicted most of Sandra Petrocelli’s, the State defense attorney’s, main arguments throughout Monster. O’Brien took the same strategy as Briggs, but she thoroughly explained more about her client’s apparent job in the murder and the testimonies on the behalf of the state. “ ‘ Ms. Petrocelli:

Evans: Just me and King.’ (SHE takes off her glasses and looks at the jury). Where was Steve Harmon, the alleged lookout man?” “The state paraded before you witness after witness who, by their own admission, testified either to get out of jail or to prevent themselves from going to jail,...” O’Brien made sure to call out the fabricated lies that accompanied and infatuated the case; furthermore, she argued the biased pleas and testimonies, and she clearly stated multiple implications that the State preceded. As a direct result, O’Brien’s saccharine defense consequently made Steve found innocent and not charged with felony murder in the trial. 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, that he