The Johnny Cade Case: Innocent Until Proven Guilty?

587 Words2 Pages

The Johnny Cade Case
Have you heard the saying “innocent until proven guilty?”That is not right. Especially in the Johnny Cade case, saying has been defeated for its purpose. Johnny is guilty for killing Bob because he killed him out of despite and anger. He was not defending himself and he fled the scene. Johnny should be in jail for killing Bob. If he was innocent, he would not of ran away and he would have stayed in town.
Johnny had hatred for Bob because in the past, he was beaten up by Bob and he let all of his anger out that night he killed Bob. If he did not have hatred for him then why would he have killed him if he did not hurt him. Johnny noticed the rings and he knew then was that the Socs who beaten him up and so he killed him. If he did not remember he might not of killed him. Johnny is guilty for killing out of anger. “He would kill the next person who jumped …show more content…

Ponyboy was the only one being hurt. If Johnny was getting beat up, he would have the right to defend himself, but if Bob was just there he did not have the write to kill Bob.Also Bob did not even swat or try to hit Johnny, so it was not self defense. “Johnny was breathing heavily and I noticed that he was staring at the socs hand.He was wearing three heavy rings.”(page 44 internet)
After the killing or murder of Bob the Socs Johnny and Ponyboy fled the scene or skipped town. If he was not guilty, he would of stayed there or called out for help not try to do it by himself. This was not just an accident or defending this was murder. Why would he need to run away if he was innocent. It makes him look worse when he changed the way he looked when he skipped town too. It was an unnecessary act of crime. “There is an old abandoned church on top of Jay Mountain.There is a pump in the back so do not worry about water.Buy a week's supply of food as soon as you get in there.”(page 61

Open Document