The Trial has strongly criticized the incompetence of court system, leading to human sufferings. Particularly, causing K’s effort to redeem himself meaningless. The court system is incompetent and the court is just the human and bureaucratic embodiment of this law. Just as the law seems inhuman and unjust precisely because it is such an abstract expression of justice, the court is portrayed as equally inhuman and unjust. For instance, K. is eager to clarify its own situation in order to get rid of the trial and regain freedom, but the external environment always induces or forces him to obey the authority and consciously abide by the rules of power. He also finally realized that from any point of view, the court is a meaningless institution. …show more content…
As the Rainville, G. (2000). book review shows the fact that "Defense lawyer care less about the truth than about their clients' right and interests".(P215-216). What the clients really care is to their own benefits. Under that circumstance, K feels confused, just like a lonely people at the sea, because he does not know what he did wrong and how to deal with it. Fortunately, his uncle has a friend who is an illness lawyer. Who may be helpful for him. After that, K. relies on the help of his female friends, his lawyer, Huld, the painter, Titorelli, and even the random prison chaplain to make his case. Eventually, with the guidance of the sense of the guilty, he is facing the fact that his trial is unavoidable and his sins cannot be washed away step by step. According to HILL, J. (2010). Whether it is the destruction of the law itself or the heavy or high-pressure means, or respond in a timely and appropriate manner. Individuals and institutions within the system exacerbate the insecurity of the people they should protect. That is the reason why K was fought for his right. However. it will be useless even though there are more …show more content…
As described by K." They couldn't have taken better precautions if I' d been a dangerous robber. And these guards were corrupt riff-raff, they keep going on at me, they wanted bribes, they tried to get clothes and linen... they demand money in order..."(P35). This shows that these guards are mercenary and dishonest. What's more. " There is no doubt that there is a large organization at work behind this court's every operation...an organization which not only employs venal guards, foolish supervisors, and examining magistrates who are at best unassuming...executioners."(P37). The author uses the words "venal guards, foolish supervisors" to describe these people, which is very vivid based on what they have been done to K. This kind of forcible behavior to seize people's property is not allowed even under modern law. Also, this is the reason why K is suffering and struggling. And all of this should be blamed for the incompetence of the court
He first puts forth the two mainstream arguments against capital punishment and then organizedly refutes each standpoint with credible explanations. By illustrating there are “many other jobs that are unpleasant”, he easily indicates the flaw and weakness of first argument asserted by the opposite side without much refutation and statistical evidence. In addition, in order to disprove the second argument, he proposes that death penalty is not established to deter other potential criminals but to relieve. He employs great length of humor, logos and ethos to introduce and exemplify this new concept of “katharsis” which is defined as a health and positive way to “let off steam”. Thus, the act of punishing the murders can be interpreted as “justice is served” in this case instead of “cold-blood killing” and the audiences get the feeling of satisfaction because it is a part of their human nature. In the later discussion, he also mentions that it is extremely cruel and immoral that people are put in the death house just for simply torture. By having both side perspectives, the readers are more convinced and become more acceptable to Mencken’s ideas.
a relationship to the courtroom and his cell, but also connected to the geographical setting of the
One prevalent theme found throughout the book is the conflict between finding the truth and the judicial process. The two are almost always incompatible with each other in the courtroom, and A Civil Action illustrates that quite well. The fight for the truth was taken over by trial tactics used by the defendant, whose goal was to keep the truth from getting out. It is natural for the plaintiff and the defendant to use tactics to create the verdict rather than using the facts of the case because both aim for success. Misinformation, partial truths, and hidden facts are common in the courtroom and one scene of A Civil Action shows how it can change the whole trial. People of the courtroom can manipulate the trial so the odds are in their favor. Rarely is truth ever the main focus.
Even with his illness, he manages to pull the case documents together and is ready to go to court. His friends helped him with make-up to cover his visible sores.
Johnny’s experience as an attorney falls far short of being the legal crusader that he envisioned for himself. Rather, it is quite short-lived . His legal career ends abruptly when his unpreparedness for an easy trial against a wealthy white woman causes him to lose the case for his client. Upon his hu...
Fear and confusion plays a huge part in the criminal justice system because of the huge number of cases and facilities unable to handle them. The building is condemned and they have new judge had begun his position as the new supervising judge. His name is Roosevelt Dorn. Beckstrand is excited to be working on Duncan's. His case is a well known infamous one and Beckstrand almost hated the kid. Offenders in this case are used to a substantial number of setbacks in the system and and finding her main witness is becoming trouble for Beckstrand. Ronald, along with the other young delinquents, doesn't seem to care about anything.
Who is the lawyer you may ask? What kind of person is the lawyer throughout the story? The lawyer doesn’t mention anything about himself except the fact of his job and age. He doesn’t even give his name nor the name of anyone in the story. Through the words that he speaks, the lawyer is a person who like to have structure. The enactment of dealing with people on a personal base is to much of a confrontation for lawyer. Through the ordeal of his interaction with each of his scriveners we learn that the lawyer plays it safe.
In closing, the criminal trial process has been able to reflect the morals and ethics of society to a great extent, despite the few limitations, which hinder its effectiveness. The moral and ethical standards have been effectively been reflected to a great extent in the areas of the adversary system, the system of appeals, legal aid and the jury
The reckless and irrational side of capital punishment is exposed through this article, presenting an inevitable flaw of the system. This allows the readers to realize that even though our judicial system appears to be just and free of bias, discrimination against minority groups still persists. This unfair favoritism towards majority groups has to be considered when forming viewpoints on capital punishment. Because many innocent lives have been put to death due to this prejudice, the unapparent flaw in the system must also be acknowledged and corrected. Although this article shows overwhelming support for the abolition of capital punishment, viewpoints on the other side are still present and ap...
This paper will focus on Capital Punishment, which we will define as execution through means of lethal injection administered by an executioner to someone convicted of murder, and for the purpose of this paper murder will be established as killing an innocent person in cold blood. It will concern the dehumanization of the condemned and the inappropriateness of employing the same morality and ethicality to someone who in the eyes of the public have lost all humaneness. Dehumanization will be, for the sake of my argument, classified as depriving someone from his humanity, and by depriving them of humanness, which is essential to ethics; we fracture the foundation of morality and ethics because without humans there is no morality or ethicality. I will argue that Capital Punishment undermines ethical and moral foundations in particular Kant’s theories by dehumanizing the condemned, therefore, opposing ethical arguments supporting Capital Punishment by making morality and ethicality inapplicable to someone who has had his humanity denied to him. I will first outline the various reasons in how the condemned is stripped of their humanity by demonstrating how it violates the value of life and how using it as revenge and as a deterrent of other crimes goes against Kant’s “Practical Imperative” which states that no human being should be seen as a means to an end because this essentially strips him of the right to live for himself. I will also show how Kant’s ethical theory regarding Capital Punishment, in which he indicates that taking a human life should always be punished by taking the offenders life, has contradictions especially in respect to the head of state where the same rules do not apply to them (Avaliani). The authorities are ...
The capital punishment has been cited as a reasonable sentence by those who advocate for retribution. This is essentially when it comes to justice so that people take full responsibility for their individual actions. Studies have proved that the decision to take away life of a person because they committed a certain crime serves to perpetuate the crime in question. It also serves to enhance the progress of organized and violent crime. It has been noted that various flaws in the justice system has led to the wrong conviction of innocent people. On the other hand, the guilty have also been set free, and a plethora of several cases has come up when a critical look at the capital punishment has been undertaken. Killers hardly kill their victims deliberately, but they probably act on anger, passion, or impulsively. In this regard, it is not proper to convict them exclusively without
The courtroom is a place where cases are heard and deliberated as evidence is produced to prove whether the accused person is innocent or guilty. Different courtroom varies depending on the hierarchy and the type of cases, they deliberate upon in the courtroom. In the United States, the courts are closely interlinked through a hierarchical system at either the state or the federal level. Therefore, the court must have jurisdiction before it takes upon a case, deliberate, and come up with a judgment on it. The criminal case is different from the civil cases, especially when it comes to the court layout. In this essay, I will explain how I experienced a courtroom visit and the important issues are learnt from the visit.
In Franz Kafka’s The Trial, Josef K. is guilty; his crime is that he does not accept his own humanity. This crime is not obvious throughout the novel, but rather becomes gradually and implicitly apparent to the reader. Again and again, despite his own doubts and various shortcomings, K. denies his guilt, which is, in essence, to deny his very humanity. It is for this crime that the Law seeks him, for if he would only accept the guilt inherent in being human (and, by so doing, his humanity itself), both he and the Law could move on. Ironically, this is in part both an existential and Christian interpretation of The Trial.
Consequently, the accused must participate in these corrupt practices to afford any chance at a favourable verdict. Thus, the judiciary may serve to create a sense of justice but in actuality only creates an unjust trial for the accused. Individuals charged by the court lack the appropriate information to understand the ambiguous law Kafka portrays, perpetuating injustice toward the accused. Early in the novel, Josef K holds the opinion that, “There is nothing hanging on the verdict of this trial, and that, whatever the verdict I will just laugh at” (71). The ironic nature of the quote becomes apparent when the novel ends with Josef K’s dying at the hands of men of the court. However, this quotation also reveals the lack of understanding Josef K has for the system. Nobody at any point explained clearly what the penalties are for being found guilty or what hangs in the balance. As a result, injustice is perpetuated toward the accused as they are not given the means necessary to defend themselves from the absurdity of the court. Additionally, the justice system is
The Trial is also meant to symbolize original sin and guilt. On the level of the individual versus the bureaucracy, Josef K. is consumed by guilt and condemned for a crime he does not understand by a court with which he cannot communicate. We see this same dilemma on the level of the individual versus an existential existence, i.e., man in the modern world trying to find meaning and justice, consumed by guilt and condemned for original sin by a god with which he ca...