Final Portfolio FSTY 1313.07
Emma Gibson Fall 2015
Table of Contents
Self-Analysis Letter - Page 3
Rhetorical Analysis - Page 6-9
Research Paper - Page 10-14
2
7 December 2015
BETH EAKMAN RE ST. EDWARD’S UNIVERSITY 3001 SOUTH CONGRESS AVE. AUSTIN, TX 78704 Dear Professor Eakman, The objective of this course is to continue to develop the skills listed for Rhetoric and Composition I and work especially on research and argumentation. It was also to gain competency in areas of Rhetoric, Composition, Research, Critical Reading, and Moral Reasoning and Discourse. Each area is comprised of three to four elements that, in breaking them down and learning how to perform them, greatly build the students as writers. I believe that I have improved in the area of Composition. In terms of my Composition, I have learned how to simplify my thoughts to convey them in the clearest way possible for my audience. When I first got to St. Edward’s, although I had a love for writing, my arguments in essays were clouded by a dense writing style. This style encompassed unnecessary and irrelevant thoughts, and complicated adjectives. A perfect example of this would be my rhetorical analysis of Bryan Stevenson’s Just Mercy. I used sentences like “the amount of evidence that Stevenson provides is copious and representative of his argument” and “the eloquent inclusion of this statistic makes the reader ponder the possibility that racism might have an effect on court rulings.” What do those sentences even mean? The intrinsic language that I used clouded my argument and kept the audience from following my claim. I also struggled with grammar when I first began my academic career at St. Edward’s. Countless times I would put punctuation outside of a quotation and what’s more, MLA format was literally a foreign concept to me. Looking back to my rhetorical analysis of Stevenson’s Just Mercy once again, I found many punctuation errors like “By achieving what is known as the ‘American Dream’,” and my paragraphs were not even indented. For the sake of this final portfolio, and
3
your sanity as an English professor, I’ve gone back and indented them. Anyhow, through out this course and the use of the Writing Lab, I was able to learn the little grammar rules that before I was unfamiliar with. Improving my grammar improves my credibility, which is a trait that will be vital in my pursuit for a career in Law. In my final research paper, I saw drastic improvements in my writing style. I was more clear-cut with my thesis, simplified my language, and considerably improved my grammar as well as mastered MLA format. My thesis for my research paper was the declarative statement, “American death-penalty policies should no longer be implemented when proven to be racially biased.” This is a strong thesis that effectively states my stance on the problem. I learned to include my punctuation inside the quotation marks, indented my paragraphs, and made sure that all other content was within the parameters of MLA format. I even included an interview that I conducted with a professor of mine in order to strengthen the relevance of my argument. Optimistically, I can get this research paper published and I’ll be able to put it on my resume. I want to express appreciation to you for recommending that to me because it truly will look impressive on my resume. I’ve learned so much in this semester. Aside from all writing and grammar skills, I have gained an understanding of the threshold concept of inequality that exists in the criminal justice system. Minorities are exceedingly misrepresented and deprived in American jails in prisons. I hate to say it, but I was almost completely in the dark about this concept until I read Stevenson’s Just Mercy, and began attending college classes. The eye opening lessons I have been taught about the American Criminal Justice System has truly helped me uncover my career path. My parents pointed me in the direction of law because I am so fervent about social justice issues, but I was very unsure abut a career in law. After this year I feel like the compass that resides in everybody’s body and soul has been woken up within mine. I feel a like I have a direction; a path; and that is to help people who don’t have the means to stand up for themselves. I also have discovered a newfound passion for learning. Its remarkable that I am given the chance to come to class every day and absorb as much knowledge as I can. I plan on making the most of that in my impending semesters at St. Edward’s. I will transfer the skills that I have touched up on in this course to all future academic endeavors. I enjoyed the linked lecture and
4
writing class because we were enabled to discuss concepts in a “safe place� and uncover ideas that each of us brought to the table. Moreover, I found many other of my classes to intersect with Freedom and Rights and it was interesting to see different perspectives on concepts. Overall all, this semester has had an immense impact on my growth as a student, young social activist, and human being.
SINCERELY, EMMA GIBSON 3001 SOUTH CONGRESS AVE AUSTIN, TX 78154
5
Emma Gibson Beth Eakman Re FSTY 1313.07 Fall 2015 Rhetorical Analysis
Effective Uses of Rhetorical Strategies to Invalidate the American Criminal Justice System
In his New York Times best selling book Just Mercy, Bryan Stevenson constructs many arguments against the death penalty, and affirms that as a whole it is flawed. Stevenson has represented capital defendants and death row prisoners in the south since 1985. He founded the Equal Justice Initiative, a nonprofit organization that focuses on human rights within the United States and is largely responsible for the reversals and reduced sentences in more than 75 death penalty cases. This memoir appeals to not only those highly-knowledgeable in legal practice, but average American citizens as well, considering the ease of the read and the extensive availability of the book. Because the American criminal justice system struggles so much with giving those who have committed crimes opportunity to correct themselves, Stevenson sheds light on the issue in hopes that society can progress. Throughout his memoir, Stevenson backs up his argument that the American criminal justice system is discriminatory and that the death penalty should be abolished by appealing to ethos, pathos, and logos. In order to prove that the criminal justice system is corrupt, Stevenson appeals to ethos through discussing his impressive achievements. By including that he was a Harvard Law student in only the second sentence of the introduction, his qualifications are brought to light and he is made more believable. His legal background gives him even more credibility to persuade his readers and his use of high legal vocabulary permits the work to be trustworthy. While Stevenson is fighting a case, his humility and sheer effort to put his clients’ needs before his own is notable and mark the character of a person that an audience would want to listen to. Stevenson’s personal life affects his ethical appeal as well. A graduate from Harvard Law School, He worked his way from a poor rural community to a well-respected career. By achieving what is 6
known as the “American Dream”, Stevenson charms the audience and makes himself not only more reliable, but more likeable as well. This engages the readers to hear Stevenson out and broadens his audience to those that normally wouldn’t give his argument the time of day. Stevenson also includes shocking factual evidence and makes a logical appeal in order to reinforce his argument. His argument’s claim, that the death penalty is wrong and unjustly enforced on innocent individuals, is stated subtly but abundantly through out the text. The amount of evidence that Stevenson provides is copious and representative of his argument. The readers can assume that the factual evidence provided is accurate because of the credibility that that the author has built. He is well-qualified to speak on the subject at hand; nonetheless, Stevenson does cite his sources when ever he brings a new detail to light. The audience could have perhaps found it disheartening that “excluding black people from jury service was unconstitutional, but juries remained all-white for decades afterward” (59) but Stevenson’s argument that the criminal justice system is flawed more believable because of it. Statistics are also strategically placed throughout the memoir for rhetorical affect, like the insertion of “In Alabama, even though 65 percent of all homicide victims were black, nearly 80 percent of the people on death row were there for crimes against victims who were white” (142). The eloquent inclusion of this statistic makes the reader ponder the possibility that racism might have an effect on court rulings. Comparably, the addition of “It wasn’t until 2008 that most states abandoned the practice of shackling or handcuffing incarcerated women during delivery” (151) forces the reader to consider how basic human rights are neglected in women’s’ prisons. Stevenson effectively proves that the current method of criminal justice is weak through these logical appeals. Finally, Stevenson uses pathological appeals when he presents many of his own opinions, which are heavily laced with emotion, to show that the death penalty is a cruel and unethical punishment. After exposing many cold, hard facts he appeals to the audience’s ethics by introducing his own thoughts and feelings. One of the most profound statements he makes is “Each of us is more than the worst thing we’ve ever done” (17-18). This thought included no facts or statistics, but appeals to the readers’ moralities. Because Stevenson has laid groundwork in ethos and logos, the audience trusts him and it is possible for him to very effectively maintain that the policy in place is not right. Additionally, Stevenson cites many cases in which the form
7
of death penalty didn’t work properly, causing the convict to suffer for an extended period of time before finally being put to death. The deliberate insertion of that extremely morbid but true detail appeals to ethos because generally humans don’t particularly enjoy observing other humans suffer. The use of rhetorical strategy and appeals to the three means of persuasion contribute most to making this book effective at its stated purpose. Stevenson attacks his point from many different angles, which helps his argument to be received the same way by the variety of people that comprise this audience. Each appeal builds ground for the next, for example, the author’s credibility allows him to provide his own thoughts/opinions, which include heavy dosages of pathos, about the matter in a way that can be trusted by the readers. There is ample evidence throughout the text to prove that the American criminal justice system is unsound, but how Stevenson chooses to display this evidence makes his stated argument effective. Ethos, paths and logos are eloquently enveloped to prove that the system is erroneous, racist, and unethical among many other unfavorable attributes. This book is eye-opening to the the blemishes on America’s track-record, and perpetuates the vast population that reads it to do something to stand up against the unjustness that is death penalty in America.
8
Works Cited
Stevenson, Bryan. Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption. New York: Spiegal & Grau, 2014. Print. "Bryan Stevenson." Bryan Stevenson. The Gruber Foundation, 2011. Web. 09Sept.2015 "Biography." NYU Law. N.p., 2015. Web. 9 Sept. 2015.
9
Emma Gibson Beth Eakman Re FSTY 1313.07 Fall 2015 Research Paper Racism’s Direct Correlation to the Death Penalty
Alarmingly, fifty-six percent of death row inmates are black or Hispanic, while a far greater proportion (seventy-seven percent) of victims in capital convictions are white, according to the Washington-based Death Penalty Information Center. American death-penalty policies should no longer be implemented when proven to be racially biased. It is the role of the American Criminal Justice System to uphold what is fair and just. This section of the U.S. government is bound to the duty of making sure all Americans feel safe, and more importantly are safe, by enforcing justice. The U.S. is held to a higher standard because of its powerful influence on the world, and it must live up to these standards. The United States government must keep pace with with the progression of values that has occurred and inevitably will continue to occur. Although some argue that racism doesn’t exist at all, it irrefutably endures in American society. Prejudices inevitably seep from American societal views into the implementation of the death penalty, tainting its Criminal Justice System. Unfair application of capital punishment deteriorates the legitimacy of the U.S. government.
10
Accepting that racism persists in society’s subconscious thoughts is a huge step towards admitting it’s influence in the application of the death penalty. It’s a popular misconception that racism is no longer a problem, however, the discrimination of racial minorities is alive and well in America today. In fact, John Dovidio, a Yale psychologist, and Kerry Kawakami, a researcher at York University, conducted an experiment in which explicit racial subconscious biases were proven to exist. In the study, a white actor – posing as a fellow participant in an experiment on team-oriented problem solving – made racist comments about a black actor – also posing as a fellow participant – who bumped against him (276; vol. 323). 71% of the of the people who witnessed this event in person made no effort to scold the white actor for his racist comments, and still chose the white actor as a partner for the designated task. Failure to feel outrage about these racist comments is called “the impact bias of affective forecasting;” The tendency for people to overestimate how strongly they will react to emotional events. When subjects don’t feel their expected outrage, they rationalize racism, according to the authors (277; vol. 323). Racism contaminates thoughts and values, even when Americans make a conscious effort to be tolerant. Racial biases that subside in the general population unsurprisingly carry over into the criminal justice system, which corrupts the decisions of jurors, judges, and prosecutors working on death penalty cases. David Baldus and Charles Pulaski, professors of law at credible universities, and George Woodworth, a professor of Statistics at the University of Iowa, published an academic journal article that supports this claim. This article substantiates that racial disparity continues to endure in the practice of the death penalty. According to a study that Baldus performed, the raw numbers indicate that defendants charged with killing white persons received the death penalty in 11% of the cases, but defendants charged with killing
11
blacks received the death penalty in only 1% of the cases (709; vol.74). American death-penalty policies are continuing to be carried out even when proven to be racially biased. One might venture to label this as the most extreme form of racism. Additionally, Russ K. Espinoza, a California State University professor and psychologist, and Cynthia Willis-Esqueda, a University of Nebraska psychologist, conducted an experiment that examines how the strength of mitigating factors influences juror decisions in capital sentencing. The results suggested “that mitigation evidence and defendant characteristics, such as defendant ethnicity and socioeconomic status, contribute to jurors’ capital case decisions” (294). This is a landmark find, once again providing explicit proof of the racial biases that exist in practices of the death penalty. Essentially, ethnic minorities are inadvertently being sentenced to death for reasons that wouldn’t always result in the death penalty for whites. The evidence that racism influences the implementation of the death penalty in America is strengthened by authors James D. Unnever and Francis T. Cullen in their academic journal article “Research in Crime and Delinquency.” Unnever works in the department of Criminology at the University of South Florida, while Cullen works in the school of criminal justice at the University of Cincinnati. In this peer-edited article, the authors research majority opinions of minority ethnicities, and find that “in 1990, …Whites who perceived African American and Hispanics as more violent than members of their own race were substantially more likely to support capital punishment” (536). Furthermore, the authors state that “by 2000 whites thought blacks were 5 times more violent than whites” (536). The authors’ findings suggest that white views on minority groups’ tendencies to employ violence potentially shifted over time and exerted significant impacts on death penalty support. Although these studies date back a few
12
years, the explicit racial biases that are exposed undoubtedly have some underlying hold on American thoughts and values today. It is the objective of a legitimate democracy to accommodate the people’s ever-evolving needs. In a recent interview, Professor of Political Science at St. Edward’s University Dr. Rodrigo Nunes, defined legitimacy as a state that, “protects [its citizens] … provides services [to its citizens], and… [its citizens] feel as though [they] can control it.” Nunes emphasizes “that if the system acts in a biased manner… then it loses a degree of rational legitimacy in the eyes of a vast segment of the population.” Currently, the United States government is failing at meeting these requirements of legitimacy. The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution forbids states from denying any person “life, liberty or property, without due process of law.” The U.S. constitution is considered the Supreme Law of the Land, a pillar that American virtues are constructed from. Statistics expose that the American Criminal Justice system directly violates this Supreme Law of the Land habitually by applying the death penalty more on people of color. There is very little chance that a system can remain legitimate if it doesn’t obey the foundation that it was built on. Since an “arm” of the U.S. government isn’t effective at its stated purpose and “targets individuals of a particular color or social background more harshly than others,” (Nunes) then not only has it lost its validity, but it has lost its authority. The citizens it governs no longer regard this arm of the government as “legitimate”. In order to develop as a nation, the U.S. must develop each individual aspect with undivided attention, starting with this blemish on the Criminal Justice System. Laws are simply codified ethics that must change over time. Accordingly, the United States government must keep pace with with the progression of values that accompanies the evolution of the human race.
13
The implementation of the capital punishment in America is unsound because of its overwhelming susceptibility to racial biases. In summary, the existence of racism in segments of society initiates a chain reaction that is rooted in racism, causing government officials to treat the American populace unequally, which ultimately leads to a loss of legitimacy within the U.S. government. If America’s reputation of equality is not restored, its legitimacy could deteriorate. It seems as though the U.S. has reached a fork in the road: to continue down a path of racial disparity or to progress into a country of equality and democratic prosperity. Since this country claims to be founded on the principles of democracy, it is the duty of the common American citizen to raise awareness for the implementation of a prejudiced death penalty. Optimistically, one day the United States government will regain its validity, authority, and legitimacy by eliminating the chain reaction that presently exists.
14
Works Cited Baldus, David C., Charles Pulaski, and George Woodworth. "Comparative Review of Death Sentences: An Empirical Study of the Georgia Experience." Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 2nd ser. 74.3 (1983): 709. Print. Death Penalty Information Center. Facts about the Death Penalty. 30 Oct. 2015. Raw data. Http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/FactSheet.pdf, Washington D.C. Espinoza, Russ K. E., and CynthiaWillis-Esqueda. "The Influence Of Mitigation
Evidence,
Ethnicity, And SES On Death Penalty Decisions By European American And Latino Venire Persons." Cultural Diversity And Ethnic Minority Psychology 21.2 (2015): 288-299. PsycARTICLES. Web. 3 Oct. 2015 Kawakami, Kerry, Elizabeth Dunn, Francine Karmali, and John F. Dovidio. "Mispredicting Affective and Behavioral Responses to Racism." Mispredicting Affective and Behavioral Responses to Racism. American Association for the Advancement of Science4, 04 Nov. 2008. Web. 17 Nov. 2015. Nunes, Rodrigo. "How a Racist Death Penalty Affects Legitimacy." Personal interview. 18 Nov. 2015. Unnever, James D., and Francis T. Cullen. "White Perceptions Of Whether African Americans And Hispanics Are Prone To Violence And Support For The Death Penalty." Journal Of Research In Crime And Delinquency 49.4 (2012): 519-544. PsycINFO. Web. 4 Oct. 2015.
15