Murder at the Margin is a book written by two economists, Kenneth G. Elzinga and William Breit, jointly known by the pen name of Marshall Jevons. The main character of the book is Henry Spearman, an economics professor at Harvard University. He and his wife, Pidge take a much needed vacation to the Island of Cinnamon Bay in the Caribbean, but not long after their arrival they come upon a highly unexpected turn of events: the death of General Hudson T. Decker. Decker is not very well-liked by many, for he is very demanding and high-strung. Authorities suspect that he was intentionally poisoned, but for Henry Spearman this conclusion alone is not complete enough. He sets to his own investigation of the mysterious and sudden death of General Decker. …show more content…
I find that a rather important one also came in the beginning of the book, where Professor Spearman makes a “lightning calculation”, which is about the probable satisfaction that purchasing a glass of iced tea while on the boat to the Virgin Islands could provide him with. What made him draw the conclusion that spending the dollar was worth it, was that a wedge of lime was placed on the rim of the glass. As Spearman attempts to apply economic theory in solving the murder mystery of Mr. Forte, he easily is able to exclude Mrs. Forte from the list of suspects for his death. This is because, as Spearman believes in his economic way of thinking, a woman would find herself to be more financially stable or on a better monetary route not to kill her husband, but to divorce him. It also appears to the reader that Professor Spearman is rather fond of economic liberty (free-market), as he often discredits or puts to shame the socialist way of thinking. He occasionally defends inequality of income as well, and makes reference to rights of private property. Henry Spearman seemingly finds a way to tie literally every aspect of everyday life to economics. On page 61, he states that, “Love, hate, benevolence, malevolence or any emotion which involves others can be subject to economic
The Greenland Natives were killed around 1000 A.D and many assumed that Leif Erikson was the murder. However, the time that this occurred Erikson was around the age of 8. How could an 8 year old kill all those natives? The answer is that he didn’t kill them, his father did. Erik the red was Leif’s father and the culprit of the Greenland Native’s deaths. Some people may have associated Leif with his father or just thought Leif did it all. But according to Saga Of Erik The Red, c. 1000 Red did it all.
After reading ‘The Murder of Helen Jewett” it gave me insight on how crime in New York City was in the 1830’s and another view on how life for men and women differed. The book starts off talking about Dorcas Doyen famously known as Helen Jewett and how she was highly thought of but then the news comes out of nowhere with several stories about her past some twisted to make her seem as bad as a prostitute who has bounced around a few times could be seen. But her actual story was that she was born in 1814 in Temple, Maine to a regular working family. She lost both of her parents at a young age her mother died when she was at the early ages of her life and he father who was an alcoholic died shortly after her mother. She was put in a home, orphaned
On November 16, 2017, Horace Verbermockle was found lifeless as he laid down in the bathroom floor at his house. What happened to Horace Verbermockle?, his wife Minnie Verbermockle claims that Horace must have slipped on soap before she found him unconscious on the floor and alerted the doctor, who stated that Horace was dead when he got there. Minnie was the major suspect in the investigation by the fact that she was the first and only witness of the body. However after reviewing the evidence found at the scene, it is positive that Minnie Verbermockle murdered her husband Horace Verbermockle.
Murder on a Sunday morning is a documentary of an unfortunate mishap with the legal justice system that happens one of many times. In Jacksonville, Florida the year of 2001, May 8th there was a horrific scenery at Ramada hotel. A women named Mary Ann Stevens and her husband were tourists, while leaving their room early Sunday morning around 9AM a gunshot fatally killed Mary Ann and ended the couple’s vacation. When cops arrived at the scene and investigated they took notes on what the suspect looked like from the husband, “ The suspect is skinny black male dark shorts unknown shirt on foot running south bound…. Fishlike hat on.”- cop at the scene. When the cops were driving around they’ve spotted an African American
He presents several concepts that connect to Inequality in a variety of ways. According to the essay, the focus is centered on inequality consisting of many forms. First, he begins by asking us the rhetorical question of whether we, as Americans, should care about it. Afterwards, provides the audience with a lengthy discussion of how bad inequality is and how it should be corrected inside various aspects including, education, healthcare, and care of children. Several of the concepts within the essay strongly appeal to ethos and pathos. This shows us that Krugman made a strong argument, supporting it as he explains gently explains inequality, and how it exists in many forms, other than academic history. Personally, I did not find Krugman’s essay difficult. Instead, I viewed it as challenging, educational and fun to read. If I were asked to read it again for educational purposes, I definitely
Murder at the Margin is a murder mystery involving various economic concepts. The story takes place in Cinnamon Bay Plantation on the Virgin Island of St. John. It is about Professor Henry Spearman, an economist from Harvard. Spearman organizes an investigation of his own using economic laws to solve the case.
Murder at the Margin, a novel written by Marshall Jevons, is a comprehensive murder mystery using economic theory to solve a collection of murders on a tropical island resort. The book really appeals to me because not only is the mystery a good one with an unexpected twist, but the main character, Professor Henry Spearman, is able to keep the reader on their toes about their suspicions throughout the book by using his knowledge and analysis of the economics observed in his everyday life. For one thing, I never imagined how the laws of economics could solve a murder. Frankly, I never caught on to who the real killer(s) could be until the big reveal at the end, and it is easy to be suspicious of the wrong people. Henry Spearman uses a multitude of economic concepts including: the law of demand, utility maximization, opportunity cost, and game theory to discover the identity of the murderer(s). However, to the untrained eye, these concepts may go unnoticed
“Murder on a Sunday Morning” directed by the documentary filmmaker Jean-Xavier de Lestrade, is a documentary film based on the false conviction of an innocent 15-year-old black African-American teenager, Brendon Butler, who got arrested when he was on his way to a job interview. The case originated from the assassination of a tourist from Georgia, Mary Ann Stephens, who at the time of the incident was 65 years old and was shot dead while she was on vacation in Jacksonville, Florida in May of 2000 with her husband. This film emphasizes multiple errors made by the police and witness during the arrest and trial of Brendon. Also displays the erroneous eyewitness identification, the non-orthodox interrogations, moreover the false confession written
My first example will be the character Daisy, who is trapped in a society of men and commands attention. She gets the attention she wants when she marries Tom, who has large sums of money without actually earning any of it. Which is the exact reason she married him in the first place. After Gatsby ran off to the war Daisy quickly married Tom when
When I discovered that my English class had to do a Research Paper, I became horrified. I thought students only did this when they were finishing graduate school not when they were starting their first year in college. All I knew about research papers was that there is an overwhelming amount of research to do. In my efforts to complete this obstacle and not bore myself to sleep with researching, I wanted to do an interesting topic, but I had no idea where to begin. I spent hours going through a great number of subjects and people, but once I found topic remotely interesting, I could not find much information on the Library of Congress website. Therefore, I decided to choose one word that would hopefully lead me to an interesting topic. I set my search limits to manuscripts and searched the word murder. There, the first name at the top of the page was Sirica, John .
Wealth also influences the way the characters’ peers view them. Wealth plays a main role in the lives of the characters despite the differences that exist. Even though the novels take place in very opposite places, the superficial longing for wealth and the existence of wealth impacts the characters in similar ways.
From dreams deferred to identity affirmed Lorraine Hansberry’s, “A Raisin in the Sun,” presents readers with many differing themes. The most prevalent and reoccurring theme is the effect money plays on society’s views of manhood and happiness. Readers are shown multiple characters with a diverse view on manhood. From Walter Lee with his matching societal views that a man should be able to provide whatever his family needs or wants to Lena whose views are a biased compilation of her late husband’s behavior and her own ideals, that a man should maintain his honor and protect his children’s dreams.
The article “The Murder They Heard” written by Stanley Milgram and Paul Hollander is a response to the article that Martin Gansberg “38 Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call the Police”. Milgram and Hollander explain why they do not agree that the neighbors of Catherine Genovese should have called the police. Milgram and Hollander give reasons why they disagree with Gansberg, and why I should agree with what they are saying. After reading both articles, I felt very conflicted with who I agree with, but after much deliberation, I realized that I agree more with Milgram and Hollander. The neighbors should not be blamed for Genovese’s death. We should try to understand why they did not call the police. There are a few things you need to take into consideration,
The night of September 13, 1986, Jonathan Nobles was consumed with a combination of drugs and alcohol when he broke into the house of Mitzi Johnson-Nalley and Kelly Farquar. Nobles brutally stabbed both Nalley and Farquar more than 20 times to death. He severely wounded Nalley’s date, Ron Ross, who barely survived with a lost eye and 19 stab wounds. During the time of the attack, Nobles was on parole for about 4 months. He was also employed by the Central Texas Crime Prevention Association of Round Rock. A week after he escaped the night of the murder scene, the police had enough physical evidence to put him in custody. That is when he confessed and showed all the evidence he had hidden. He said he did not remember everything that happened the night of the murders because of his impairment from drugs and alcohol. In 1987, Nobles was found guilty and placed on death row for the murder of Nalley and Farquer. Nobles was not rehabilitated. He knew right from wrong given that he was on parole for theft and employed at a crime prevention association, he showed no remorse when he plead insanity at his trial, and he used the media to convince the public that he changed.
Michael Sanders, a Professor at Harvard University, gave a lecture titled “Justice: What’s The Right Thing To Do? The Moral Side of Murder” to nearly a thousand student’s in attendance. The lecture touched on two contrasting philosophies of morality. The first philosophy of morality discussed in the lecture is called Consequentialism. This is the view that "the consequences of one 's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct.” (Consequentialism) This type of moral thinking became known as utilitarianism and was formulated by Jeremy Bentham who basically argues that the most moral thing to do is to bring the greatest amount of happiness to the greatest number of people possible.