5102 REBMECED
Final Portfolio
.C.A
American Crime
Exclusive insight from
Bryan Stevenson Page 5
kooC nodnyL
Public Defender Extraordinaire
Letter to Beth WHAT I LEARNED IN COMP TWO THIS YEAR
By Lyndon Cook
Beth Eakman Re St. Edward’s University 3001 S Congress Ave. Austin, TX 78704 Dear Professor Eakman, Over the course of this semester, I learned some major concepts for writing and improved my own rhetorical skills. In this Freshman Studies composition class, I learned about deeper rhetoric, editing and revising tactics, and multimodal text all under the umbrella concepts put forth by the book, “Just Mercy” by Bryan Stevenson. Through the instruction and assistance received in this class, I feel like my writing abilities have been significantly enhanced. One of the main strengths in my writing repertoire before this year was mapping out the rhetoric of a piece, but this ability was still not to the level I would have preferred it.
After ripping up several rough drafts and a few tutoring sessions with Lauren, I was able to turn my rhetorical analysis from another run-ofthe-mill piece into something I could be proud of. This improved analysis of rhetoric is best exemplified by my assessment of Stevenson’s ethos, “Stevenson has written books, given speeches, and even started the Equal Justice Initiative in attempts to aid those for whom adequate representation would be impossible otherwise. His credentials on this field are without equal.” This transformation from a solid writing base to a more polished level was very important to my learning experience in this class. My improvement on the use of rhetorical devices in my writing has “unlocked” a greater range of abilities that I have only now began to fully utilize.
Letter to Beth | 2
Another aspect of my writing I improved in
. In conclusion, the concepts and skills
this class was my transitioning between
which I learned and honed in this class has
key points. In previous attempts to write
been a true benefit to my abilities as a
long papers my instructors frequently
writer. While my rhetorical analysis of
marked off for my works being disjointed
other authors and transitioning have seen
or disconnected. Just as with the use of
some of the most noticeable
rhetorical devices, my transitioning is now
improvements, my use of multimodal text,
markedly better due to the instruction I
writing clarity, and grammatical skills have
received. In my rhetorical analysis, I sewed
also been visibly enhanced. Thank you for
together the three aspects of rhetoric
your time and help over the past few
(ethos, pathos, logos) almost seamlessly
months, the experience has benefitted me
but struggled with connecting other points.
greatly.
Note the noticeable jump from, “ Stevenson leaves the audience with no doubt. His ethics on this subject are
Sincerely,
legitimately peerless.” to, “This work is reminiscent of the “muckraker” genre, as it wholly plunges itself into the depths of injustice where few others would dare to go.” The best example of the improvement of this skill comes from my research project. In transitioning between a point about discrimination of the poor to one over preferential treatment of the rich, I employ the following sentence: “The poor have no power and therefore face the brunt of inequalities from systems the rich control. This concentration of power and wealth has resulted in capital punishment turning into a weapon of class warfare for the rich to use against the impoverished.”
Lyndon Cook
A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF
BRYAN STEVENSON IN HIS BOOK, " JUST MERCY "
By Lyndon Cook
y&
Equalit
y
Justice Get the Death Penalt
In America, there is a stark and growing income gap. This is no new information to anyone. But looking beyond this inequality there is a second, parallel gap between rich and poor. This divide is a division of justice. In Just Mercy by Bryan Stevenson, the full effects of this gap are shown with no suppression. The higher classes of society know nothing of the severity even a minor charge can bring against someone without the means to fight it. But when the crime committed is major, such as rape, arson, or murder, defense for the accused is near impossible, regardless of innocence. It is not uncommon for a poor, minority culprit in the South to face the death penalty with no adequate representation, condemned by a prejudiced judge and/or all-white jury. This common scene is completely devoid of any semblance of justice, yet it continues to end lives, whether the accused is innocent or guilty.
Stevenson utilizes his massive experience in dealing with such issues to establish a connection between himself, the work, and his audience, both logically and pathologically. The most effective argument made by Just Mercy is the utter disparity of justice and equality in our court system for those who are without the fiscal means to fight for their freedom, and more specifically, their lives. Bryan Stevenson has done his part. He is a Harvard-educated lawyer who has been on the front lines fighting against injustice on basis of race and fiscal clout for thirty years. Stevenson has written books, given speeches, and even started the Equal Justice Initiative in attempts to aid those for whom adequate representation would be impossible otherwise. His credentials on this field are without equal. Stevenson leaves the audience with no doubt. His ethics on this subject are legitimately peerless.
AMERICAN CRIME
|
5
This work is reminiscent of the “muckraker” genre, as it wholly plunges itself into the depths of injustice where few others would dare to go. This book shows mainstream America what it is like living as a poor minority in the South through a number of different sets of eyes. Darnell Houston, Antonio Nunez, Walter McMillian, Charlie, George Daniel, Kathleen Enstice; these are their names. They, and others in similar situations, have no need of this book. These people are living testaments to Stevenson’s work and conversely, to the problems in the courts. Stevenson is imploring the mainstream of this country to do something and advocate on their behalf. This is no passing of the torch moment, as Stevenson continues to fight for an end to inequality, this is a call to arms. His work is a good place to start, but without further action or intervention, more and more people in this bleak scenario will be unjustly condemned to die. Stevenson bases all of his arguments against the death penalty on either his own firsthand experience or scientific fact. He has seen the atrocities committed against inmates in southern prisons. Stevenson has witnessed prisoners being beaten, starved, and even kept in cages. His takeaway from this experience is summed up as, “Presumptions of guilt, poverty, racial bias…. have created a system… in which thousands of innocent people now suffer in prison.” (16) Nowhere is the injustice associated with the wealth gap better shown than when Stevenson notes that, “Women, whose numbers in prison have increased 640 percent in the last thirty years, and have seen how… our hostility to the poor have made us quick to criminalize and prosecute poor women when a pregnancy goes wrong.” (17) Women with the fiscal means to retain even the lowliest of lawyers can easily fight any charges against them on these grounds.
However, impoverished women who cannot afford to fight these trumped up charges can face harsh jail time, simply because they are not financially able to defend themselves. There is no logical explanation for why this is occurring in this country. The rich can walk free on just about all charges (i.e. Great Recession bankers, etc.), while the poor are jailed and fined because frankly, they just cannot afford the fight. Add that to the fact that even if enough funds were raised to fight the case, the odds of winning decrease significantly on the basis of wealth alone. Stevenson’s best logic as to why this should not be happening is showing the absolute lack of logic used in our court system. This is a nation of “Justice For All,” not “Justice For Those Who Can Pay,” yet southern courts seem to have this backwards. Stevenson illustrates this point countless times throughout the book and his thirty year career, yet it seems to be falling on inattentive, if not deaf, ears. If the rich received such terrible representation in the courts with the death penalty on the line, there would be a multitude of special interest groups and political campaigns dedicated to getting them better protection in next to no time. But since the poor are the ones facing this problem, there are only Bryan Stevenson and others like him championing the rights of the poor. Stevenson’s logic about this problem is sound. The true problem lies within the fact that the court’s logic is anything but. What really makes Stevenson’s argument compelling is his portrayal of not only his emotions, but of the entire affected community. The outrage at this injustice is depicted just as vividly as the sorrow and heartbreak. Stevenson is both saddened, “I drove home broken and brokenhearted about Jimmy Dill,” (294) and infuriated, “‘This is so messed up. I live here. You shouldn’t have done this. Why did you do this?’” (42) by the obstacles he faces both in the courtroom and in his personal life.
AMERICAN CRIME
|
6
In showing his own frustration he bridges the emotional gap between himself and his audience. The audience has no choice but to sympathize for this man who so tirelessly and selflessly strives to get people the liberty they deserve. Instead of the old comic book storyline of bringing the wrongdoers to justice, Stevenson flips the script and is in effect bringing justice to the accused wrongdoers. That is his mission throughout the entire book, whether he is defending Walter McMillian from a wrongful death sentence, or attempting to get the fourteen year-old Charlie out of adult prison. These men would have no chance of escaping their fate without Stevenson’s intervention, although he is too humble to come out and say that. His appeals to the audience’s emotions are broad and sweeping. Stevenson does not seek to glorify his individual struggles, he simply attempts to bring a disturbingly real issue out of the dark and into the mainstream. He wants his readers to feel for impoverished minorities as a whole, not just the singular instances he references in his book. There is no logical reason that in twenty-first century America, a person’s life can be saved or expunged purely on the basis of wealth, not guilt.
Poor men and women routinely have their freedom taken away by prejudiced judges and juries, whereas the rich can dodge charges by merely pulling out their checkbook. Just Mercy illustrates just how serious the consequences of being poor or a minority can be for someone accused of a crime. Bryan Stevenson has given over half of his life to these struggles for justice in the American South. He has unheralded amounts of experience on these issues. His logic poses many questions that must be asked of the court system. The emotions Stevenson evokes when describing the lives he has touched or watched end are powerful enough to embroil the nation in a dialogue over the death penalty. Yet because the victims of these atrocities are on the wrong side of the income gap, Stevenson’s quest for justice remains unfulfilled. This is a society where money has more legal clout than actual innocence. The rich commit crimes just as heinous as the poor, yet their legal experience is worlds apart from the one that poor people face. Stevenson’s rhetoric exposes the logical fallacies in the courtroom, and shows how serious the implications of a death penalty can be for those in poverty. Stevenson hopes that, just like his client Walter McMillian, his long struggle will end with success and freedom.
AMERICAN CRIME
|
7
PAGE 8
AMERICAN CRIME
RESEARCH PROJECT
Capital Punishment: Institutionally Accepted Class Warfare ARTICLE BY LYNDON COOK FEAT. BRYAN STEVENSON Within the current U.S. Criminal Justice System, there are two groups of defendants: Those that are innocent, and those that are guilty. Ideally, the innocent group would escape punishment, while the guilty would pay for their crimes in a method deemed fair by all parties. But recently, the way the two groups are formed has undergone a seismic shift. Justice is no longer determined by guilt or innocence, it is determined by the wealth of the defendant. The rich face reduced sentences or no charges with a startling frequency. The poor, on the other hand, are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law with no quarter given. And unfortunately for those in poverty, this “fullest extent” is often execution And in Texas, where this discrimination will be fully examined, capital punishment has turned into nothing more than systematic persecution of the poor. Everything is bigger in Texas, including the total amount of people executed, outstripping second place by some four hundred and eighteen executions.
Texas’ trigger happy death penalty policy doles out the ultimate punishment with disheartening frequency to the state’s poor. Luckily, there are ways to avoid the death penalty if accused of a crime serious enough to have capital punishment called for. However, all of these require resources that most in poverty can only dream of. A good lawyer can be the difference between walking free and receiving a death sentence. But as with most services in a capitalist society, the premium versions do not come cheap. Due to a lack of resources, the poor’s lives are put into the hands of overburdened or incompetent public defenders. Having a defense attorney that is trying to juggle multiple cases at once, or one that is in the process of being de-barred attempting to fight the death penalty on one’s behalf does little to inspire much confidence in the system. Sadly, the inequality of justice the poor face does not end there. The poor are powerless to change this dire situation, as in this country money equals power. .
PAGE 8
AMERICAN CRIME
The poor are disadvantaged in almost all areas of the courtroom, while the rich can avoid charges altogether due to their wealth. The status quo of the death penalty in Texas is in violation of the U.S. Constitution and many other laws, and desperately needs to be reexamined before more poor are needlessly put to death simply because of their social status. All of these facts point to one truth across the Texas justice system: Capital punishment disproportionately persecutes the poor in Texas due to inadequate representation, socioeconomic discrimination, and the unfair legal advantages of wealth, and the way it is currently being administered should be illegal. One of the largest problems faced by the poor when they face criminal accusations is their legal defense. In America’s viciously capitalist system, good lawyers do not come cheap. While those at the top of the legal defense food chain defend high profile clientele, those at the other end of the spectrum defend a different demographic. Since the 1963 Supreme Court decision Gideon v. Wainwright, those too poor to hire their own lawyer have been defended by public defenders in what is known as “Indigent Defense.” This system model works well on paper. The rich and middle class can select their personal choice of lawyer, while the poor receive counsel and defense from publicly funded lawyers at no cost to themselves. But when applied to the legal world, this system is largely and inherently flawed.
RESEARCH PROJECT
According to the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the average time spent meeting and preparing a defense can be as low as ten minutes per defendant in some parts of Texas (Antoun 2). The root of this problem can be traced to decades of neglect for American public defenders. Public defense offices are drastically undermanned and cash strapped, so it should surprise no one when the system cannot keep up with the rising tide of accused poor in need of defense. Mandatory minimums and other related laws that crack down on crime do nothing but increase this problem. In some cases, the accused is innocent of all wrongdoing, yet still serves jail time due to plea deals or a rushed defense. Public defenders are simply overwhelmed by the status quo, which makes it all too easy for prosecutors to convict the defendant, whatever the charges may be. This is not saying that public defenders are infallible beacons of justice, however. Some defense attorneys are just plain incompetent Take the case of Texas woman Linda Carty, for example. In what has since been described by Rebecca Lowe of the International Bar Association as, “a catastrophically flawed trial,” Carty received the death sentence after her attorney Jerry Guerinot (who incidentally has over twenty death sentence convictions to his name) mounted an “utterly implausible” defense (Lowe 1). Carty was convicted in 2001, and remains on death row in Texas to this day.
PAGE 9
AMERICAN CRIME
Lowe also points to the death sentence given to Calvin Jerold Burdine (also in Texas), whose attorney incidentally slept through parts of his murder trial, as another prime example of the ineptitude found in the public defender system (Ultimate Price of Poverty 2). Whether the attorney is overwhelmed or incompetent, the fact remains that this entire system is in desperate need of an overhaul. The lives of the poor are systematically being taken away all due to the fact that their legal representation is not up to scratch. The current system does nothing but marginalize, abuse, and execute America’s poor. Where is the justice in dooming a person accused of murder to the death penalty without giving them a true attempt at proving their innocence? Besides the fact that the current U.S. Criminal Justice system is an abnormality devoid of justice for the poor, it should be known that the status quo is unconstitutional. The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution clearly forbids states from denying any person, “Life, liberty or property without due process of law,” or to, “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” (Meyer 1). What this amendment describes could not be further from the realities of today’s court system. The poor are being deprived of life, liberty, and property without true due process or equal protection. This is marginalization at its worst. The poor have no power and therefore face the brunt of inequalities from systems the rich control. This concentration of power and wealth has resulted in capital punishment turning into a weapon of class warfare for the rich to use against the impoverished.
RESEARCH PROJECT
Capital punishment is a major problem for the poor of this country, specifically Texas. Approximately forty percent of the defendants accused of murder in the Lone Star State face the death penalty in their trial. When the defendant is under the poverty line, this number jumps to a whopping seventy-six percent (Redick 1). This jump in thirty six percentage points is no coincidence. Prosecution teams are more likely to push for the death penalty when the defendant is in poverty, just as judges and juries are more likely to hand down an execution sentence. This discrepancy in justice simply should not exist. There is no way that the poor are guilty in almost double the murder cases as their better-off compatriots. Just as allwhite juries and prejudiced judges influenced trials against minorities in times past, today’s juries can be unduly influenced against the poor. A jury can be “accidentally” misinformed of not being able to recommend a life sentence over the death penalty. Judges can flip a jury’s life imprisonment ruling into a death sentence with little to no oversight. When the poor are put at the mercy of a select few who share no empathy with their defense, justice is misrepresented and lives are lost. The combination of prejudiced judges and/or juries along with little to no transparency of how decisions were made mean that this badly flawed system can continue sending the poor to death row. Nothing is being done on a federal or state level to fix this problem of prejudice. Many see this as a system-wide acceptance of the discrimination that exists, further affirming the idea that capital punishment is being used as a weapon of class warfare.
PAGE 10
AMERICAN CRIME
Where the poor are being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, the rich are walking away scot-free for the same crimes. The adage, “There are no millionaires on death row.” is a statement of fact in this country. It’s true. Only drug kingpin and alleged mass murderer Juan Garza has been put to death since the death penalty’s reinstatement in 1976. This is not an attack on wealth or the rich, however, as America needs both to continue its existence. The target of this argument is the dual justice systems of the rich and poor. The two could not be more polar opposites. Robert Durst, millionaire heir of real estate mogul Seymour Durst, was investigated for the murders of three different people spanning two decades. After the 1982 disappearance of his wife and the 2000 execution style murder of a longtime friend resulted in no formal charges or full investigation, Durst was finally taken into custody after pieces of an elderly neighbor’s dismembered body were found floating in the Gulf of Mexico near Galveston in 2001. Durst hired highly respected defense attorney Dick DeGuerin to defend him in court. Durst plead self-defense and got off on the murder charge, but was convicted of bond jumping and evidence tampering and ended up serving three years in jail (Doyle 1). It goes without saying but if Durst was poor, there is an overwhelming suspicion that he would have been convicted and put to death. Sadly, Durst’s story is consistent with many other murder trials of the ultra rich.
RESEARCH PROJECT
O.J. Simpson, John DuPont, and Robert Blake are all members of the upper class that have been accused of murder and have avoided a death sentence or even been found innocent. This paints the true nature of capital punishment in this country. While the poor are put to death, the rich serve three years in jail for similar crimes. And it should come as no surprise that the state in which Durst escaped punishment was Texas. Texas has never carried out the death penalty on anyone with a yearly income of greater than one hundred and fifty thousand dollars (Redick 3). Of the five hundred and thirty people executed in Huntsville since 1982, approximately four hundred were below or near the poverty line. This discrepancy is unacceptable in any nation or state that values justice. Texas might be the most frequent perpetrator, but it just exemplifies for the federal government to reign in capital punishment. In a nation that validates class warfare through institutions that execute the marginalized, it is only a matter of time before a real uprising breaks out. A nation where the rich control the justice system is a nation that is poor in regards to justice. A major trait of a just society is equality. But when examining the criminal justice system, and specifically the death penalty in Texas, equality is not the word that springs to mind. The poor face inequalities in their legal defenses, ways they are prosecuted, and the fairness of trials.
PAGE 11
AMERICAN CRIME
Conversely, the rich are the ones making the rules and rarely, if ever, face the consequences the poor would face for similar accusations. The current state of indigent defense has been construed into such a way that it is inconsistent with not only the Supreme Court decision that established it, but also the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. “Equal protection,” in no way describes the current public defender system. More accurate adjectives would be, “inept, incompetent, or overburdened.” The rich take their pick of lawyers, while being assigned to some attorneys is as good as a death sentence for the impoverished. The Texas state government seems to be fine with this system as is, and with no forthcoming federal interventions it looks set to continue in this manner. Discrimination is an omnipresent part of the poor’s courtroom experience. From judge to jury to prosecution teams, the poor on trial receive decidedly worse treatment than their economically well off counterparts. In a state such as Texas where the death penalty is the preferred punishment for murder, those in poverty are being put to death at a wildly disproportionate rate than those with fiscal stability. The government’s continuing marginalization of the poor within its own institutions is a complete contradiction of the very values this country was built on. Until capital punishment is curbed in Texas, and all states for that matter, this country’s justice system will continue to be the medium through which class warfare is waged against the poor.
RESEARCH PROJECT
Images provided by Slate.com