Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The theme of inherit the wind
The theme of inherit the wind
The wind rises analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The theme of inherit the wind
Many people like to believe they know what is right from what is wrong, but when it comes to the court system and the search for justice, Henry Drummond will fight for the cases that no other lawyer has the audacity to take on. Drummond exhibits an undying perseverance to fight for Bertram Cates in the Scopes Trial depicted in Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee’s play, Inherit the Wind. Through Henry Drummond’s tactfulness, open-mindedness, and determination, he is able to make a biased town see the absurdity of a law that takes away a person's right to freedom of thought.
Henry Drummond’s tactfulness allows him to convince a partisan jury of the absurdity of putting a man on trial for simply expressing an unpopular viewpoint. Drummond shows
…show more content…
Drummond, unlike everyone else in the town does not see everything as black and white allowing him to understand cases such as Bert Cates’, where the defendant is against the entire town and is convicted before the trial even begins. Drummond demonstrates his open-mindedness and ability to defend Cates’ right to think when he blatantly mocks Brady in trial declaring, “Then why did God plague us with the capacity to think? Mr. Brady, why do you deny the one faculty of man that raises him above the other creatures of the earth? The power of his brain to reason” (Lawrence and Lee 93). Drummond’s main defense is that Bert Cates was merely exercising his right to human thought and opinion in his classroom, even though he was knowingly breaking a law. Drummond tells Cates, “You don’t suppose this kind of thing is ever finished, do you? Tomorrow it’ll be something else-and another fella will have to stand up. And you’ve helped give him the guts to do it!” (Lawrence and Lee 123). Drummond understands that just because Cates broke the law first, he is not the last because it is an unjust law that attempts to remove a person’s ability to exercise freedom of thought. Drummond, unlike many people at the time, possesses the ability to put himself in another man’s shoes and understand their perspective when everyone else …show more content…
Drummond is adamantly fighting for the truth throughout the trial and will not stop until he has revealed it to the people. He illustrates his persistent search for the truth and justice when he says, “You know that’s not true. I’m trying to stop you bigots and ignoramuses from controlling the education of the United States! And you know it!” (Lawrence and Lee 98). Drummond’s dedication to proving to the jury and the world of Cates’ innocence shows how he will stop at nothing to gain justice and reveal the truth behind a case where a man is convicted for the crime of free thought. Drummond is not only determined to prove to the jury of Cates’ innocence, but he also wants Cates to realize it himself. He is resolute on showing Cates that fighting for the truth and what he believes in is more important than conforming to society when he states, “But all you have to do is knock on any door and say, “Cates, I’ll change your plea and we’ll call off the whole business-on one condition. If you honestly believe you committed a criminal act against the citizens of this state and the minds of their children. If you honestly believe you’re wrong and the law’s right. The hell with it” (Lawrence and Lee 52). Drummond will do whatever it takes to help Cates in trial, but only if he is ready to stand up for what he
Pagan writes a captivating story mingled with the challenges of the Eastern Shore legal system. This book gives a complete explanation backed up by research and similar cases as evidence of the ever-changing legal system. It should be a required reading for a history or law student.
Based on a true story, “Gideon’s Trumpet” covers the events of Gideon vs. Wainwright and how it proved to be an important case for the United States legal system. ¬¬¬¬It shows that even after 200 years of changes and refinement, the United State’s legal system is far from perfect and is always improving. The movie provides a visual representation of the struggles between the haves and have-nots. The haves, also known as repeat players, are people who have superior access to resources, money, and superior legal experience. They are usually people who have been in multiple legal situations and know how to handle themselves in these legal situations. On the opposite end of the spectrum are the have-nots. The have-nots, also known as one shotters,
With such a minor sentence, Darrow is said to be the person who actually won the trial. In the play Inherit the Wind by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee, the character, Henry Drummond, parallels his real-life counterpart, Clarence Darrow, through
The purpose of this essay is to compare three very similar cases, the Scottsboro Trials, Brown v. Mississippi, and the fictional trial of Tom Robinson in Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird; and to prove why the defendant of the third trial never had a chance. Each took place in the rural South in the 1920’s and 30’s and involved the unfair conviction of young black males by all-white juries pressured by the threat of mob violence. Each lacked the evidence sufficient for conviction, most especially for the death penalty. Last, heroes emerged from each trial and made small but solid steps towards equal justice for all.
For instance, Alexander supports her argument by telling the story of Jarvious Cotton, his father could not vote because of the voting poll taxes and literacy test back in the Jim Crow era, and now as a felon and currently in parole, he is being denied the right to vote (alexander 1). Alexander, using this story as an example perfectly fulfills and persuades the reader into her argument, that even through time, the similarity of discrimination is the same between mass incarceration and Jim Crow, where the U.S. criminal justice system deprives them of the right to vote. Therefore, Alexander also mentions an example about mass incarceration. For instance, the story of Drake, a Vietnam veteran, who spend five years in jail and as 2004 elections arrived, his voting rights were under a $900 dollar fine (Alexander 159). This example successfully convinces the reader Alexander did not only gave an example where the Jim Crow law took place, but also included a recent alike situation where the similarities are not quite
Robinson trial; (2) prejustice and its effects on the processes of the law and society; (3)
Guilty or not guilty? This the key question during the murder trial of a young man accused of fatally stabbing his father. The play 12 Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, introduces to the audience twelve members of a jury made up of contrasting men from various backgrounds. One of the most critical elements of the play is how the personalities and experiences of these men influence their initial majority vote of guilty. Three of the most influential members include juror #3, juror #10, and juror #11. Their past experiences and personal bias determine their thoughts and opinions on the case. Therefore, how a person feels inside is reflected in his/her thoughts, opinions, and behavior.
Caldwell, Malcolm. “The Courthouse Ring: Atticus Finch and the Limits of Southern Liberalism.” Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird: New Essays. Meyer, Michael J. Lanham, Md: Scarecrow Press, 2010. 57-65. Print.
Another powerful opinion yearning to be exposed, is the one held by Henry Drummond, the defense’s attorney. The lawyer undoubtedly came to d...
?What is left when honor is lost?? Publilius Syrus' quote, though dating from 100 B.C., still seems pertinent to our era (Quotations). Many people still feel that once integrity is lost they are nothing and many are willing to stand up to keep their integrity. Without integrity, we are nothing. During the time that Arthur Miller wrote his most famous play, The Crucible, innocent men and women are accused of having Communist leanings. Their whole lives are ruined in a short amount of time because they refuse to compromise themselves by selling out their friends. Miller tries to make a statement about these unfair trials by comparing them to the Salem witch-hunts and trials of 1692. The main protagonist of his play is a man named John Proctor who is accused of witchcraft but stands up to maintain his name and his honor, even though he is hanged for it. During the H.U.A.C. trials some took stands for their beliefs with the knowledge of possibly being shunned by society. Knowing this, instead of taking the cowards' way and giving the names of their friends, they refuse to tell the committee anything in the same way that John Proctor stands up against a court that is ruining the lives of innocent people.
Traditionalism and conservatism have always threatened the “rights” and easily strengthened the “wrongs” of society. Liberal ideals allow some people to see past the norms of the time into the heart of the matter or to predict a better future. Victimized people may be forced to see things differently even if they are not naturally liberal. The Crucible shows how these people—the liberals, victims and liberal victims—fought to stand by what they knew to be right, even when all of the voices and norms of society were against them. In the Salem in the play people who were accused were urged to confess based on the testimonies of others and the traditions of severe religious consequences and
Johnson, Claudia. "The Secret Courts of Men's Hearts: Code and Law in Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird." Studies in American Fiction (1991):129-139.
New York: Library of America, 1998. 63-84. The 'Secondary' of the 'S “Trial by Jury.” Time 3 Oct. 1955: 18-19. “The Place, the Acquittal.”
These injustices have begun long before Tom’s trial, but it is his trial which epitomizes the problems with our society. The first witness was simply just a misguided fellow named Heck Tate who it seems didn’t have much to offer to the case. Next, Atticus Finch called Bob Ewell to the stand. When I saw Ewell take the stand such a fierce hatred rose within me that I began to shake and tremble. Ewell wrongfully accused Tom of raping his daughter Mayella, however, with the grace of God, Atticus Finch had shown that it was very possible that it was Bob Ewell who because he was a lefty could have beat Mayella. If it were not for great men like Atticus Finch I would have lost all hope for this world. As I watched Mayella take the stand I wondered how such a kind looking person could be someone of such poor character. Her words seemed to paint a picture of a sad life; one where a father neglects her and she has fallen under hard times. Atticus, after pointing out it was probably Bob who beat her, asked Mayella who it really was that beat her. Mayella made it clear it was Tom Robinson, upon which Atticus asked Tom to stand. To the astonishment of the court Tom was handicapped! Tom was then called to the stand where he laid open for all to see the truth, explaining that it was Mayella who came on to him (that treacherous woman!). Soon enough the trial ended and every one awaited the verdict of the jury. The next few hours were the most nerve wracking of my life.
The play "A view from the Bridge" by Arthur Miller shows the tragic demise of its protagonist "Eddie Carbone" and towards his demise we are presented with two different yet similar concepts; justice and the law. Although the two words usually stand side by side, "A view from the Bridge" shows how they are sometimes not synonymous with one another through: a belief in communal law or community values, the American system of justice and the analogy of settling for half.