A Time to Kill pt 2

One ethical dilemma in the movie is when Carl Lee is pondering what actions to take to deal with men that raped his little girl. He is trying to decide if he should trust our legal system to provide justice or take the law into his own hands. This issue was portrayed as an easy decision for Carl Lee after he sought counsel from his lawyer regarding a similar case in which two white men raped a young black girl in a neighboring county and were cleared of the charges by an all white jury the year earlier. Carl Lee resolved the issue by taking the law into his own hands instead of trusting the legal system and he murdered the men that were accused of raping his daughter in cold blood while they were en route to their arraignment. This issue could have been resolved when Carl Lee first visited Jake at his office. At that point, it was clear Carl Lee was thinking of doing something drastic and Jake had the opportunity to persuade Carl to trust the legal system and ensure him the prosecution would seek the maximum sentence and death penalty for the men that committed these horrific acts. However, the lawyer did not do this. Given the circumstances, if I were in Carl Lee’s position I would have more than likely made the same decision knowing that the probable punishment would not fit the crime if the men were allowed to face a trial. The previous trail’s results indicated justice would not have been served in this particular setting. Although murdering these men is completely wrong in the eyes of many, including the legal system, I do not think I would have been strong enough to refrain from completing these illegal acts. In my opinion Carl Lee served a “greater good” by taking ruthless criminals off the streets.

A Time to Kill pt 1

In the movie “A Time to Kill,” the American legal system was portrayed in a negative light in most instances. The film is set in the southern state of Mississippi and it revolves around a symbolic legal case in which the main character, Jake Brigance, is a white lawyer arguing for his client, Carl Lee Hailey, a black man facing murder charges. As one would imagine, racial prejudice contributed many factors to the overall quality of work environment for the lawyer and the defendant in this particular setting. In addition, Jake’s law firm was in financial trouble and was having a hard time attracting new clients prior the events occurring that led to Carl Lee asking Jake to defend him. The defendant was charged with the murder of two white men in cold blood that had brutally raped his 10-year-old daughter. This legal process exemplified the vast amount of racial prejudice that was obvious in the south at the time. The film illustrated how many different groups had a stake in the outcome of the case, as it case was symbolic for whites, blacks and the American legal system.

These circumstances vastly affected the world in which Jake was trying to do business. As quoted from Jake’s mentor in the movie, Lucian Wilbanks, while discussing whether he should take on the case, “The case is very interesting  because you could win and justice would prevail or you could lose and justice would also prevail.” After deciding to take the case, the backlash and racial prejudice from the community infiltrated Jake’s business throughout the movie. Jake was merely trying to perform his job and he was constantly being harassed for accepting the job of defending Carl Lee. The hatred eventually led one of the victim’s brothers to begin to organize a branch of the Klu Klux Klan in the town where the movie takes place. These Klan members terrorized Jake for representing Carl by burning crosses on his lawn, kidnapping and assaulting his co-workers, planting a bomb in front of his house and eventually burning his home to the ground.

They continually made efforts to disrupt his work in an attempt to get him to drop the case. Another element that exemplified the insecurities of the business world portrayed in the film was a scene involving Jake, Carl Lee and the NAACP. At one point, the civil rights organization had their leaders try to convince the defendant to take the case away from Jake because he was white man and they did not think he could do a good enough job representing a black man in such a symbolic case for the black people. However, the scene later illustrated how much faith the defendant had in Jake as Carl Lee slyly pressured the group to give the money they raised to pay for his defense with their lawyers, to Jake. In addition to racism, corruption affected they way the business world was portrayed in movie. During the course of the trial, the white prosecuting attorney, Rufus Buckley, utilized “connections” at many levels of the government including influencing the judge presiding over the case. Most importantly, when Jake attempted to get the trial moved to a different venue to ensure his client had an “impartial” trial, Buckley made calls to his “friends” at the legislature to help influence the judge’s decision on the matter. It was obvious the prosecuting attorney was corrupt and had no regard for business ethics. The combination of all these factors did not create a good environment for Jake to practice law.

Extra Credit Blog Post #2- Lauren Kelleher

Lauren Kelleher

Extra Credit Blog Post #2

           

            This article by E.J. Dionne has a brief passage of Barak Obama’s farewell speech saying “Obama’s moving farewell address in Chicago on Tuesday night  had heart.” Dionne then moves on to the warning given in the soon to be former presidents speech “warning and a plea: an alert about the dangers our democracy confronts and a call for Americans to be active and vigilant in protecting our liberties.” This summation of that part of the speech was clearly about the next presidents threat to American’s rights and liberties, quoting the president directly saying ““We must guard against a weakening of the values that make us who we are.”” Dionne then takes this warning to talk about the connection between Donald Trump and his many conflicts of interest, including the ties to Russia and his many companies and their “blind trusts.” Dionne warns her audience of these clear conflicts of interest saying “But given Trump’s relentless public praise for Putin and the derision he has directed at those who mistrust Russia and its intentions. The accusations need to be dealt with very seriously and investigated meticulously. We know that Trump’s denials can never be believed until they are independently confirmed. The new standard for presidential statements must be: “Mistrust and verify.””

            I agree with this author whole-heartedly.  A lot of the time the government tells American’s something and we don’t know if it is true or not and we have to trust them, however even when we can clearly see that Donald Trump is lying he still continues to lie. What does this mean for when we don’t have other sources fact checking the president?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/01/12/obamas_moving_farewell_trumps_terrifying_hello_132770.html

Real Clear Politics

Trump's Presidency plans

When Trump was running for office, he had many plans including building the wall and lowering taxes. Now that he will be president, he has to actually come through. The president of Mexico has already said he refused to pay for the wall, and trump's financial plans will add trillions to the debt. Trump has also been skirting around questions during interviews and press conferences. Trump needs to be more clear about his plans when he is president.

Extra Credit Blog Post #1- Lauren Kelleher

Lauren Kelleher

Extra Credit Blog Post #1

            This article by David Harsanyi critiques President Obama’s farewell speech saying “Last night, he offered Americans a revisionist history of his entire presidency, casting himself as a resilient truth teller and champion of “democracy.” The reality is quite different.” Throughout this article Harsanyi compares Obamas farewell speech to his campaign speeches saying “his farewell speech to the nation was brimming with the same kind of haughty lecturing we got back then.” In addition to comparing these speeches and aquates them for being the same, he says the speeches themselves by saying “no matter how meticulously Obama constructs his sentences. This isn’t exactly as blatant a falsehood as our incoming president likes to drop on occasion, but it’s no less misleading.”

            I love the way the president delivers speeches with his caresmatic and  emotional language. My whole family went to Barak Obama’s presidency announcement speech in 2007, and I remember being too far away to hear and being very, very cold because I refused to but on snow pants. However I looked up that speech a couple years ago and even as a young politician Obama had the power to inspire American with his words. The information in Obamas speech is subjective and there is evidence that he is right and wrong depending which news source you use, but the way he made my mom cry in many of his speeches is something that few people can do.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/01/11/comforting-fictions-of-obamas-farewell-speech/

Eyes on the Prize- Lauren Kelleher

Lauren Kelleher

Eyes on the Prize blog post (late sorry)

            The part of the documentary Eyes on the Prize that stood out to me the most was story of school integration. Integration of schools was something that was legal but was not actively fought for until decades after it was made law. The struggle that the first black students went through just to go to school in the morning astounded me to actually see the footage of. I am fortunate to go to a school that is very diverse but I often wonder how integrated it is. When I think about whom my friends are they are mostly white, and this movie made me think the historical events that could be the reason for that. Even the classes I attended I see a difference in the diversity of a regular class vs. a honors or AP class. There is historical evidence that undeniably proves that the history of African Americans in this country very much effects todays life.

A Time to Kill-- Lauren Davis

Is what Carl Lee Haley does “justice”?
Carl Lee Haley did vigilante justice by killing the two men who brutally raped his daughter and left her for dead. I think it is a form of justice, but I don't think it was legal. My father always told me that time for me was time he was willing to do, meaning he intended to kill anyone that assaulted me.

Why does CLH commit this crime?
In the movie, they try to argue that CLH did this because he was insane, but I think everyone knew that he was really just heartbroken and angry. It was more than just his daughter being raped, beaten, and stripped of her ability to have children. CLH was fighting for black people everywhere who have to deal with abuse at the hands of white folk who assume there will be no retaliation.

What should CLH’s punishment be?
In my opinion, CLH did society good by removing pedophilic racists from his community. I've never had an opinion this simple, but I believe that had I been in his position, I would have done the exact same thing. CLH deserves to walk free.


Are the scales of “justice” balanced where this story takes place?
The scales of justice are absolutely not balanced in this story. A black man is on trial for killing two white men in a place where the jury is all white and the KKK is running rampant in the town. Had this not been a movie, that man would have been sentenced to death in a matter of minutes (if nobody killed him first).

Does it/should it matter whether Tanya Haley is black or white?
Although it shouldn't matter, it does matter that Tanya Haley is a black girl. Black bodies, black struggle, and black pain are looked at much differently than that of a white girl. This is why intersectionality is so important when we look at things like this, because when you are a person of color your gender is inherently tied to your racial identity. She was not only a target for pedophiles, she was a "nigger". Her personhood was completely invalidated.

Does due process work for CLH the same as it would any other defendant?
In the movie, it does work out the way it would for any other defendant, but that's not the way it is in real life. White boys who film themselves raping an infant can walk free, but black men who were wrongfully accused of raping an adult woman will get years in prison. The justice system is extremely broken, and this movie was simply a movie.

A time to kill- Xavi rivera

1. No, what Carl Lee Haley did was not justice. Even though those boys did deserve to die for what they did, that does not mean that Haley should have killed him. Everyone deserves a fair trial, no matter what they did or are accused of. I understand that Haley was feeling helpless because of the inherent bias in the courts, but he should at least allow the justice system to run its course. Haley did what any distressed, furious father would do. He tried to defend its daughter, but in reality, nothing he could do would reverse what happened to his daughter.
2. CLH knows that these boys will probably get off easy because of the racism in the Deep South, so he kills them because he thinks it is the only sure way to get justice. CLH is distraught because of what they did to his daughter, so his anger controls him and makes him kill those men.
3. I don’t think CLH should receive a punishment. CLH was “insane” at the time the crime took place, and could not control his actions. So, CLH should not get a punishment. He was trying to protect his daughter, and was frustrated because of the racist court system.
4. The justice scale was unbalanced because of how segregated the south was and because of the racism present during the time. The South has a lot of ingrained racism because of the history there. A history of slavery and Jim Crow have caused some in the South, especially those in rural communities without much education, to continue a pattern of racism.
5. No, it shouldn’t matter whether Tanya Haley was black or white. Tanya was a little girl, regardless of race, who was innocent and deserved nothing that happened to her. However, her race did play a significant factor in the crime and trial. If she was white, not only would the trial have been better for CLH, the crime probably would not have been committed. The court would have most likely been more sympathetic to
6. a white man with a white daughter than to a black man with a black daughter.  
7. Due process should work but because of the racism that was present during the time it interfered with CLH’s right to due process. Everyone deserves a right to a fair trial, and their right to due process. I think if race wasn’t a factor then this case would have gone unnoticed and not have received as much attention as it did.

A Time to Kill-Lauren Kelleher

Lauren Kelleher

Gordon 5

A Time To Kill blog post

1.     What Carl Lee Haley did in was not lawful justice because it was not justice achieved through governmental law systems, however moral justice is a whole new issue. Morality of two men kidnapping, beating, and raping a 10-year-old girl and only receiving a 2-year sentence would drive any father to feel that pain so deeply it would drive him to kill. My father along with many fathers I know would have probably taken similar action to Carl Lee however does are valid reason make it just? I believe that a 2-year sentence is unjust but taking justice into your own hands is also unjust.

2.     Carl Lee Haley committed the crime of killing the two men who kidnapped his 10-year-old daughter, beat, and rapped her almost to death for fairly clear reasons. Her father also feels the trauma that a daughter goes through, almost as deeply, and the rage that came from the denial of justice for his daughter and family combined with the anguish from the rape drove him to commit murder.

3.     Carl Lee Haley’s punishment should be minimal jail time because I do believe that we as a society cannot permit vigilantly justice even with reason. But I also believe that Carl should have a large amount of psychological evaluation and treatment for him and his family.

4.     The scales of justice are hard to ever be balanced because to quote Mathew Miconahay in this movie “you the jury are the eyes of the law.” The fact that the jury was all white in a case where a black man shot two white men, no matter how valid the reasons are, CLH’s actions would have been seen differently if the races were reversed.

5.     The only way that Tanya Haley’s race would matter in this case would be if it were seen from the perspective of a hate crime. Because of the clear racism in the South during this time the men knew that they could get away with what they did or at least get a lesser sentence. The way that the men treated this 10-year-old girl could only have been fueled by racial hatred. The line that Mathew Miconahay’s character in his summation when he asked the all white jury to imagine that Tanya Haley was white, speaks volumes about the extent that he had to go to for the jury to have empathy for Tanya Haley.

Fritz Gallun and Lauren Kelleher Donald Trump Cabinet Appoint Blog Post

Albert (Fritz) Gallun

Lauren Kelleher

Trump's Cabinet

1. Ben Carson

Ben Carson has been appointed to Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. He is very under qualified considering that he has no political experience aside from running for president as the GOP candidate. He has even admitted that he has no department experience. It is  

2. Tom Price- Secretary of Health and Human Services

Tom Price spent 20 years as a private practice orthopedic surgeon, and serving on various medical boards. Price then served as a Georgia State Senator, and was elected a House Representative in 2004. The likelihood of Tom Price being approved by the senate is high. Price’s values align significantly with the Republican party, and given that the majority control in the Senate is Republican, the likelihood of Tom Price being approved by Senate is high. Tom Price has been drafting alternatives to Obamacare for years; most recently the Empowering Patients First Act of 2015. This plan encourages the individual private market and health savings accounts, and insures (across state lines) pre existing conditions. Price’s plan also prohibits the use of federal funds to perform abortions for religious reasons.

3. Rex Tillerson- Secretary of State

Rex Tillerson, the CEO of Exxon Mobil has been appointed Secretary of State, the 6th largest revenue generating company in the world. Rex Tillerson has no political experience but does have experience communicating with other countries, which could prove to be a conflict of interest. In 2011 Exxon Mobil and Rosneft (a Russian Oil company) signed a deal to acess arctic oil hot spots. Russian president Vladimir Putin awarded Tillerson the Russian Order of Friendship later that year. The Senate control is republican which makes the appointment more likely, however some senate members might find the conflicts of interest with Russia and other countries hard to overlook.

A Time To Kill - Daniel Frederick

1. When determining whether or not Carl Lee Haley committed an act of justice, one must turn and interpret the definition of the term “justice”. According to the Oxford Dictionary, justice is defined as just behavior and treatment, with “just” referring to what is morally right and fair within society. The actions of Carl Lee Haley resulted in the death of two criminals who had immorally raped and abused his daughter, and while Carl Lee Haley committed this crime on the true basis that the justice system was biased and would not charge his daughter’s rapists, he did shoot and kill two individuals. Based on US Law, it is only justifiable to murder another person in self-defense if you fear for your life, or if it is to prevent a serious crime. In this case, the crime was already committed, and the criminals were in custody and posed no physical harm to Mr. Haley. Therefore, he did not commit an act of justice.
2. Carl Lee Haley commits this crime because, as stated above, he correctly believes that the judicial system will not charge his daughter’s rapists, and is so angered by this fact that he decides to take action into his own hands.
3. CLH should be charged with first degree murder because his actions were premeditated and he committed them willingly. The punishment for a first degree murder is life without parole, according to the law.
4. The scales of justice are not balanced in the southern state where CLH’s trial is located. It is a primarily white county, which implies a bias toward incriminating a Black defendant or by believing prior to the trial that the defendant is guilty. This skews the jury’s perception of the case at hand, making it more likely he will not receive a fair trial.
5. It does matter that Tanya Haley is Black, but ideally, it should not. The reason it matters why Tanya Haley is Black is because justice would not be present in the criminal case regarding her rape simply because of how little the white judge or jury would care for the wellbeing and livelihood. If race were not a factor in the legal system, or within people’s perception toward a legal case, it would not matter whether a victim is Black or white.
6. As stated in question four, Carl Lee Haley does not receive due process, or fair treatment through the normal judicial system because both the judge and the jury were inherently biased against CLH on the basis of his race.

A time to kill - Ryan Harrison

1. Is what CLH does “justice”?

No. I think justice for those two men would be rotting in a prison cell for the rest of their life. But Carl Lee Haley knew that that wouldn't happen and it was possible they may not even be convicted so he tried to get his own justice.

2. Why does CLH commit this crime?

Carl Lee Haley killed them before the trial because he thought that they would not receive justice through the justice system. He was furious because of what they did to his daughter and knew that

3. What should CLH’s punishment be?

I think he should be punished. He should not have murdered them especially before the ruling was made. I think he should go to jail but not for that long. Maybe 2-3 years. The boys definitely deserved what CLH did to them, but once they were in custody he should have waited for the results.

4. No justice is not the same for white people as it is to everyone else. If a black man committed those crimes the would have been locked up for a very long time, but if the trial had been finished the two white men would have probably received a less harsh punishment. There was a white judge, and many of the jurors were white also during controversial cases. The south was not a fair place for trial between white and black conflicts.

5. It does matter, but it obviously shouldn't. I think in today’s world it doesn't matter much, but back then being black significantly affected how you were treated. Plenty of white people killed black people and were let off clean, but if it was the other way around a black person wouldn't stand a chance. The fact that Tanya Haley is black made them want to commit the crime.

6. I think CLH did receive due process in his trial. But I feel like the white men would not have received due process if they had been tried. CLH had a lawyer and a team working with him and it seemed like the trial was as fair as possible back in that time.  

-Ryan Harrison

Quinn Evans A Time to Kill

A Time to Kill Blog

1. Under the law Carly Lee Haley’s actions were not justified, because at the time he killed those two white men they posed no threat to him. I can also see where he was coming from when he murdered those two white men after they brutally rapped his 10 year old daughter, and I think just about every other father can. There is nothing a parent loves more than their kids, and when someone does something as sick as those men did to his kid I can see why he would kill them. So I think that his actions were justified personally, but that’s not how the courts will see it.
2. Carl Lee Haley killed those two white men because they brutally beat, and rapped the one thing he loves most in his life his daughter. He knew that because of the time period and the area he was living in, a small town in Mississippi, that those men were most likely going to get off scot free, and he wanted them to pay for their actions, as would any other father going through that.
3. Under the law Carl Lee Haley should have done some jail time, even though he had a valid reason for killing those men.
4. No the scales of “Justice” are not balanced where they take place, because it took place in a small town in Mississippi, which is notorious for having Klu Klux Klan members, and racial discrimination.
5. To the people in that town of that time period honestly I think it does matter whether Tanya Haley is black or white, because if she was white there would be no question that the two men who committed that crime would be in jail, or dead.
6. No because there were KKK members in the law enforcement team that arrested him so that makes a difference. Also his lawyer had to fight for some basic rights that any other white male would have gotten. The jury was also in my eyes not qualified, because they were all white, and that almost ruined the whole trail for him, because the jury wanted to convict him of being guilty before the trial was over and that would have never happened if it was a white person on trial.
   
   

Time to Kill-Ayoub El Ashmawi

1.I don't believe what CLH did was proper justice. I am in no way saying it wasn't justified, but at the same time just killing them before even waiting for the trial (even if it 140% will be rigged), I think that's wrong.
2.I think the biggest factor in CLH killing those boys is sheer rage. Rage at his daughter being raped and severely injured and rage at the very prejudiced justice system that he knows will fail to get any justice.
3.I do not believe CLH should receive punishment. What he did was caused by the rape of his very young daughter, and anyone is capable of that when put in his shoes in my opinion. I think the insanity defense could work.
4. Due to the racism and very long and messy history of racism in the south, many whites there still are living in the past. This causes the justice system to be very unfair, even if the Jim Crowe era is over.
5. Theoretically, of course it shouldn't matter if she was black or white. In the real world however, she probably would have had a better trial and a more sympathetic jury if she was white. It should be understood that the rape of a little girl though, no matter her skin color, is horrific.
6. N-O.The trial was not fair due to CLH's race, as the place the trial took place has been historically horrible to blacks. Again, theoretically due process should work but because of the intense racism in the courts and the town, it unfortunately does not.