Argumentative Essay: The Chicago 8 Trial

This procedure shaped an all white jury. Defense counsel opposed this development prior to the

Due to the high levels of publicity that surrounded this case, it was nearly impossible for the court to find a completely impartial and oblivious jury. Everyone in the surrounding area had knowledge of the atrocious way that these murders took place and many already strongly disliked Mr. Rolling. Police officers

Although, he did fix his concentration on performing the perfect crime. Together, Leopold and Loeb murdered fourteen year old Bobby Frank. This goes down as one of the many of brutal murder scenes of the 1900s. If they wouldn’t have gotten the best lawyer in town, Clarence Darrow, it is more than likely that Leopold and his partner would have been hung instantly just as Dick and Perry were. Their attorney had such great points that were made, the judge only made them serve life in

The court cases of Manson, Leopold and Loeb, and Bukharin were utilized by the main defendants to provide commentary on certain aspects of their respective societies. Darrow’s closing argument focused on the plight of wealthy teenagers, the course materials introduced in the educational system, the historical progress made regarding the death penalty, and the impact that sentencing Leopold and Loeb to die would have on society. Manson’s testimony focused on the American jail system, President Nixon and the average person’s role in the Vietnam war and society’s outsiders. Bukharin’s last plea primarily focused on how the Show Trials will look to future generations and future societies. By analyzing the cases, comparing and contrasting them with

On the other hand, the 18 defendants were all named and granted permission to defend themselves without fictionalization. While the testimonies of the witnesses felt like an elegy about the horrors they endured, the distasteful rationalizations, disparities, and denials of the defendants created alternative versions of history. Weiss strategically placed the statements of the witnesses, perpetrators, and the judge next to each

With that money, they chose one of the most popular defense attorneys at the time, Clarence Darrow. At the time, Darrow was one of, if not the most popular criminal lawyer in the nation. He is most known for his defense in the famous ‘Monkey Trial’, and also saved around 50 other accused murderers from execution, many of which were beyond a doubt guilty (Knappman). He made the decision to have the defendants plead guilty in order to avoid a grand jury, and have the sentencing and verdict come directly from Judge Caverly himself. Darrow’s goal was to keep his defendants from getting the death sentence by asking the judge to consider their age, their guilty plea, and their mental condition (Baatz).

Clarence Darrow was a criminal defense lawyer who would be defending both Leopold and Loeb, he was famed and known for many things, “Victories in a series of spectacular trials, many of them desperate cases made him a national figure, especially his defense of Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold in Chicago in 1924… By introducing psychiatric evidence, a novelty at the time, and invoking a sense of pity for the inscrutable human predicament, Darrow cast a spell over the courtroom” (Foner). A strong disbeliever in the death penalty, Darrow instructed Leopold and Loeb to plead ‘not guilty’ in order to avoid death row. They were both directed to plead they were mentally diseased, to which Darrow brought extensive psychiatric evidence, many mental ‘diseases’ of the time (emotional immaturity, alcohol abuse, glandular abnormalities, sexual longings, etc.) and even brought countless witnesses to attest to the mental ‘diseases’ of the two boys (User). Even though state issued psychiatrists saw normal emotional responses in both Leopold and Loeb and no physical bias for mental abnormality, two weeks later the judge announced his decision and sentenced the two 18 year old boys to life in prison instead of being put to death (User).

One of the most glaring aspects that underline the trial's unfairness was the biases and prejudices that pervaded the courtroom. During this era, the

When looking at the detailed about this trial let’s examine the background of the defendants. In 1924 Nathan F. Leopold and Richard A. Loeb were charged with kidnapping and murder of 14-year-old victim who was a cousin of Loeb; Bobby franks. They were both sentenced to life imprisonment

As a result of their different racial groups, the script makes it clear that the men, at times, struggle to relate to the defendant. At several points in the script, jurors hold the defendant to standards both higher and lower than they do for themselves. Juror #10 takes this to the most extreme degree possible; towards the end of the story, he goes on a hatred-fueled rant, spewing hateful rhetoric towards Puerto Ricans (Rose 100). His life up to this point, being part of such a privileged group in society, has allowed him to form and keep his bigoted opinions. He can’t, and quite possibly never will, truly understand the plight people like the defendant experience.

Many still believed the five were guilty, including the officials on the case, so finalizing the case was very difficult. The officials continuously fought every proposed settlement and refused so many compromises. This caused the trial to go on for decades until a new mayor came into office and the case was finally settled (Finn 1). This trial only further caused emotional damage to the five men since they had to go through a rough trial for over a decade while continuously being accused of doing the crime even after being proven innocent. Additionally, the city of New York continued to deny any wrong doings and claimed the police and prosecutors were just doing their job (Weiser 1).

The verdict of the Trial of the Chicago 7 was manipulated by society through propaganda, technology, and bias. The most impactful factor that influenced the verdict of the Trial of the Chicago 7 was propaganda. The Trial of the Chicago 7 was a battle fought mentally by the American people (Linder 1). While the case was focused on organized political protest and crime, the riot turned court case took place in 1968 and 1969 (Vile 2).

“I find it deeply upsetting when I see justice not being served. How do we as human beings deal with the unknown? The West Memphis Trial is a joke on so many different levels” - Atom Egoyan. The West Memphis Three case is one of the most famous trials ever as there was a documentary released covering the case. The documentary got nationwide attention and interest from celebrities like Johnny Depp, the most involved one of all.

Twelve Angry Men is in many ways a love letter to the American legal justice system. We find here eleven men, swayed to conclusions by prejudices, past experience, and short-sightedness, challenged by one man who holds himself and his peers to a higher standard of justice, demanding that this marginalized member of society be given his due process. We see the jurors struggle between the two, seemingly conflicting, purposes of a jury, to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent. It proves, however, that the logic of the American trial-by-jury system does work.

This process continues throughout the course of the movie, and each juror’s biases is slowly revealed. Earlier through the movie, it is already justifiable to label juror 10 as a bigoted racist as he reveals strong racist tendencies against the defendant, stating his only reason for voting guilty is the boy’s ethnicity and background. . Another interesting aspect of this 1957 film is the “reverse prejudice” portrayed by juror