A time to kill is undoubtedly one of the best movies that bring out the whole issue of racial prejudice and discrimination as it happened in the ancient American society. Racial prejudice did not only end at personal interactions but had even spilt to powerful systems in society such as the judiciary. The actions of the prosecutor for instance, tend to oscillate between two decisions, the initial decision that Tonyas father is guilty of revenge and the other decision that actually, carl Lee Hailey was justified to revenge for his daughter since the compromised judicial system could have easily let the suspects walk scot free.
In his submissions, the prosecutor portrays Carl lee Hailey as an unruly character who doesnt care about the law of the land, a case of insanity. His plea is that Tonyas father had committed serious felony that requires no other punishment other than death penalty. In fact, as a lawyer, the prosecutor has all that it takes to convince and influence the final verdict of the case. He doesnt show any emotions of even towards a suffering young girl who was forcefully raped and almost murdered. The irony in this case is that the court system is likely to sentence the complainant to death when it could have set the perpetrators free.
According to the prosecutor, nothing whatsoever can justify Carls actions of shooting the two suspects. In fact, to a great extent, the submissions of the prosecutor influence the presiding Judges ruling to deny Brigance change of venue. In an open court system, the prosecutor tends to manipulate the entire systems to believe that blacks, such as Carl Lee, should be extremely punished for nay offence they commit, regardless of the circumstances, while the same law should be loosed when it comes to prosecuting white offenders.
The prosecution defense as presented in the movie is likely to hinder administration of justice to Tonya, a victim of rape and attempted murder. The trial in this case seemed to be inclined towards upholding the prosecutors version of the case, especially during the preliminary hearing. However, the prosecution trial attorney was quick to note the genuine facts in the submissions of Carls attorney. For instance, it is actually the cross-examination of the lawyer that changed the fate of the case. While it was initially destined to fail, the truth witness story as narrated by Brigance brought in emotions that prompted the attorney who then overruled the submissions of the prosecutor.
In conclusion, the decisions of the prosecutor tend to compromise the entire affect the criminal justice system. While he is expected to remain impartial and submit facts, the prosecutor in this movie seems to have a skewed stance that is racially determined, a move that further fuels the animosity between white and black Americans. He seems to favor the white Americans at the expense of a free and fair trial. As a result therefore, there is little hope that due justice will prevail in such a system. For instance, such prejudiced prosecutions can easily grant impeachment of office bearers where there is no reason or even authorize unfounded sequestration. The summation of evidence set the convicted free of any guilt and contempt of court and thus the objection by his lawyers were listened to and acted upon.
Need a paper on the same topic?
We will write it for you from scratch!
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SpeedyPaper website, please click below to request its removal:
- Leadership in an Organization
- Analysis of Jim: The James Foley Story
- Deaf Events
- International public relation
- Summary Overview
- Video Games and Real-World Violence
- The Opposite of Loneliness Analisys
- The Fault in Our Stars
- Prison Overcrowding
- A Workaholic
- Finding Ourselves in Nature
- Evaluating a Sources Usefulness and Credibility