PULSEBUSINESS.COM
ISSUE NO. 15
Porfolio
RHETORIC AND COMPOSITION II
Featuring
Mallory Hicks
SELF-ASSESSMENT LETTER
RHETORICAL ANALYSIS
RESEARCH PAPER
Author, Mallory Hicks, assesses her growth and developement within Beth Eakman Re's Rhetoric and Composition II
A riveting rhetorical analysis of the book, Just Mercy by Bryan Stevenson.
A poignant research paper about the mistreatment of mentally prisoners
Self-Assessment Letter
Mallory Hicks Mallory Hicks 3001 South Congress Ave. Austin, TX 78704 Dear Beth, During the course of this semester, I have learned a great deal. Our Freshman Studies class allowed me to expand my boundaries and understand new concepts. These concepts, such as discussions of the death penalty, shaped my opinions into a solid understanding in my views of the death penalty. We focused a great deal on rhetoric, which I was not as confident in defining at the beginning of the year. Now, my ability to define and analyze rhetoric is far superior to what it was before. Just Mercy by Bryan Stevenson influenced my moral reasoning, as well as allowed me to develop an argument and prove my reasoning. It paired excellently with Freedom Rights, because of our discussions about capital punishment. Our discussions in class allowed me to understand how to make rhetorical argument, using research that I conducted myself. Your class allowed me to think in ways I hadn’t thought of before. My confidence in writing a research paper is at an ultimate high. The ability to write a paper has always been one of my strong suits, however, this class challenged me. In the beginning, I felt as if I could not write a decent paper for the life of me. I felt like everything I wrote was subpar and irrelevant. However, my grades proved differently and I began to see how well I could meet my full potential. You gave me the confidence to write decently, but most importantly, change my major to English Writing.
DEC 2015
RHETORIC AND COMPOSITION
Rhetorical Analysis Prejudice and Pride: The Fall of PreDestination in the Light of Humanity The book Just Mercy, written and narrated by Bryan Stevenson, sheds light on the political and social injustice of the United States judicial system. Stevenson, a Harvard Law graduate and founder of the Equal Rights Initiative, argues the ethicality of the death penalty. Throughout the book, he uses facts and personal anecdotes to draw an emotional appeal from the audience. Stevenson’s work with death row inmates over the past several decades, showed him the acute injustice of the criminal justice system. Many of his clients face disadvantages such as: low income, misrepresentation, and racism, which affect the way the courts rule their death sentence. With all of these obstacles, many inmates are doomed to certain death without their personal backgrounds taken into account. Stevenson points out that, although many of the acts committed were heinous, people are more than their crimes. As Stevenson delves deep into the backgrounds of each inmate, he is able to explain why some inmates are the way that they are. Stevenson argues that inmates should not be permanently defined by the crimes that they have committed, therefore the death penalty should become obsolete.
Stevenson uses his personal anecdotes as a key rhetorical strategy. These anecdotes persuade the reader by establishing his credibility, as well as appealing to the reader’s logic and emotion. For example, Stevenson’s client, Herbert Richardson, epitomizes Stevenson’s call for consideration of the client’s background (Stevenson 69). Richardson received a death row sentence after detonating a bomb on the front porch or his former girlfriend. The explosive killed one child, as well as severely injuring another. The court presented Richardson as a villain and perpetrator of heinous crime, worthy of receiving the death penalty. However, Stevenson points out that, although Richardson did commit the crime, his past is not taken into account of the ruling. Richardson, a war veteran, struggles with post-traumatic stress disorder, as well as suffered abuse as a child. With his mental health in shambles, he depended on his nurse who soon became his girlfriend. When she ended the relationship, Richardson went to great lengths to win her back. To prove his love, devotion and, worth, Richardson detonated the bomb so he could rescue her and win her back. Although he did commit the crime, it was not to kill, nor even to hurt.
02
LIFESTYLE TRAVEL Stevenson uses this example to appeal the reader’s logic, ethics and emotion. Stevenson presents these discrepancies against Richardson by revealing the facts of the trial. Herbert Richardson’s story causes the reader to question the court system’s logic in convicting a man with serious mental health issues. Because of his mental illness, Mr. Richardson did not possess cause and effect reasoning. The reader also empathizes with the fact that Richardson did not commit the crime out of malice. In fact, Richardson was close with the two young victims, amplifying the tragedy. Richardson’s conditions make it apparent that a capital murder charge is unjust. However, the Supreme Court did not allow a stay of execution, and Richardson was executed. The way Stevenson illustrates the execution, which includes a heart wrenching farewell from Richardson’s brand new bride, again evokes pathos from the reader. Herbert Richardson committed a tragic crime, however, he was unwell. His original lawyers did not represent him correctly, and his tattered past was not taken into account during the trial. Stevenson shows that Richardson is not evil, but broken. Richardson’s brokenness causes draws the reader to question: should people who are misunderstood and damaged, be condemned to die. Stevenson argues that they should not. Another tragic and controversial anecdote Stevenson uses to persuade the reader, is the experience of Charlie (115). Charlie murdered his mother’s violently abusive boyfriend, George, in retaliation after George nearly beat Charlie’s mother to death. Charlie was sent to an adult prison at the age of fourteen, where he was sexually and physically abused. Charlie’s small stature, young age, and motives for the murder make him susceptible to sympathy from the reader. George’s aggressive, volatile behavior creates another persuasive puzzle piece, because the reader understands why Charlie acts out against him. Although Charlie’s crime is murder, Stevenson’s pathos appeal persuades the reader to pity Charlie and crave a happy ending.
&
SEPT OCT 2015
03
Fortunately, the Supreme Court barred the death penalty for children a year prior to Charlie’s case. He received five years in a juvenile prison, living with the crime he committed. Charlie grew to become a “smart, sensitive child who was tormented by what he’d done and what he’d been through” (124). Charlie embodies Stevenson’s claim that inmates are more than the crimes they commits, as he continued life after his sentence pursuing a college education. Charlie and Herbert Richardson’s stories assist Stevenson’s argument, because they consist of ethos and pathos appeals. When these appeals work together, they create the logos appeal. Stevenson subtly challenges the reader to create logical reasoning. For example, Stevenson presents a case that he worked, providing every detail, using persuasive facts. To take a side, the reader has to review their ethics, which are persuaded by an emotional appeal- like the inmate’s background, and come to a logical decision. As the three parts work together, Stevenson’s argument comes together. Besides anecdotes, Stevenson uses shock value. Within Just Mercy, Stevenson depicts several executions, sometimes very graphically. The depiction of an execution creates more reaction from an audience, than only stating that an inmate is executed. Stevenson includes the record of John Evans’ execution, which details “the overpowering stench of burnt flesh and clothing” smelt in the witness room (54). The imagery of the suffering and death of an inmate immediately evokes an emotional appeal, as well as an ethical appeal. As Stevenson creates discomfort for the reader, he forces them to question whether or not electrocuting a person to death is ethical. Stevenson’s use of the electrocution is strategically placed; the reader has a moment of empathy, which allows them to overlook the crime, and delve straight into the humanity of the situation. The reality is, these executions are cruel and unusual.
WWW.FRAMEMAG.COM
|
20
RHETORIC AND COMPOSITION .Stevenson uses all these appeals to create a tone that lets the reader be in charge. His arguments create an atmosphere for the reader to think for themselves, but also sheds light on the injustice the death penalty. Stevenson acquaints the reader with individuals to display the humanity of the death row inmates. Each has their own story, a story that depicts their actions and reasons, while taking into context their past. Many of Stevenson’s clients had harsh, unforgiving pasts; although that does not excuse their crimes, the courts should take into account their struggles with the deliverance of mercy. Convicted criminals should not be condemned to death, forever defined by the person they were when the crime was committed
DEC 2015
04 04
RESEARCH PAPER
MENTAL ILLNESS AND THE INJUSTICE OF A NATION By Mallory Hicks
Thirty-eight out of fifty states in the U.S. use the death penalty (Bain and Thomas), According to the mental health group, Mental Health America, five to ten percent of death row inmates in America, suffer from severe mental illness. Those convicted of the death penalty and suffer mental illness should not be put on death row, because it violates the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution, which specifies that the government cannot impose cruel and unusual punishment. Within the criminal justice system, mentally ill convicts receive unjust sentencing, such as capital punishment, due to disadvantages including insufficient litigation, inability to stand trial, and lack of attention from the Supreme Court. In many cases, the lawyers insufficiently defend their clients, which leads to worse sentencing for the convicted. For example, Bryan Stevenson writes about his client, George Daniel, who suffered severe mental damages from a car accident. His state defense lawyers lacked the ability to work together and spent the trial bickering.
They presented no evidence and called no witnesses (190). Daniel suffered an insufficient trial, as well as a poor psychiatric evaluation from a fraud doctor, which swayed the jury to convict him with the death penalty. In another case in Texas, Scott Panetti, a man convicted of homicide, defended himself against capital murder charges with no counsel, donned in a cowboy costume and a purple bandana. He attempted to call John F. Kennedy, Jesus Christ, and the Pope as his witnesses (ACLU 1). According to a Newsweek article, “His statements were described as rambling and incoherent, and at one point during the trial, he fell asleep (Walker 1). These behaviors are characteristics of schizophrenia, from which he suffered from the late 1970’s until he shot the parents of his estranged wife in 1992 one night after he didn’t take his medication. The court ruled that Panetti receive the death penalty, and scheduled to die of lethal injection in late 2014. However, the case was appealed to the Supreme Court and the
"In some states, the jury is asked to determine
Although sentencing mentally ill felons to death violates
whether the defendant is a future danger to
this law, sentencing an inmate to death. In Georgia Warren
the Eighth Amendment, many court cases have bypassed
Hill, convicted of two counts of murder, fell just short of
society or whether the crime was outrageously
the mental requirement to receive exemption from the
and wantonly vile, horrible and inhuman. Are
grandfather call him
juries capable of discerning whether an intellectually disabled person is also capable of meeting these elements? Are juries able to determine whether a profoundly mentally ill
death sentence. Hill’s sister recalls their mother and
“stupid retard,” “dumb ass,” and “routinely beating Warren until he was unconscious.” Eventually, three professionals “stupid child.”
She recalls them
reevaluated him and found that he was, without a doubt, mentally disabled (Stull 1). However, he continued to sit on death row, until he was executed in late January of 2015. The Supreme Court refused to take action and appeal the stay of execution. According to the CNN report,
…the NAACP, the Georgia
“in a
joint statement released
person is so impaired that their culpability is
Council on Development Disabilities, and Georgians for
reduced?"(Bright 671)
decision to deny clemency, ‘an embarrassment to our
Alternatives to the Death Penalty called the board’s state’” (Gallman 1). In another case, John Ferguson, who faced trial for multiple murders, was executed, although he experienced mental psychosis over a span of forty years.
“Prince of God,” and
The responsibility of the jury can affect the verdict, which leads
Ferguson believed himself to be the
to the conviction of the death penalty. Ideally, the disadvantages
was convicted, not for his crimes, but because the
of a mentally ill felon should not convict them to death, however
government wanted to prevent him from rising to the right hand of God. He believed that once he was executed, he
the lack of proper defense creates an environment for injustice to
would reincarnate in the same body and return to fight the
occur.
Antichrist (Arceneaux 1). Ferguson’s erratic behavior
Another challenge that mentally ill convicts face, is their
insinuates that he suffered a great deal from mental psychosis. Diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia,
inability to stand trial. According to the Supreme Court:
Ferguson’s attorney’s failed to mention his diagnosis to the
“Competency to stand trial is a concept of jurisprudence allowing
jury, another example of discrepancy in litigation.
the postponement of criminal proceedings for those defendants who are considered unable to participate in their defense on account of mental or physical disorder or retardation.” Again, Bryan Stevenson’s client, George Daniel serves as an adequate example, because of his inability to stand trial. In his first trial,
However, once the court recognized that Ferguson suffered from mental illness, the court found that his illness did not interfere with the trial. Ferguson’s attorney’s created a petition, arguing that his execution violates the Eighth Amendment, claiming,
“A condemned prisoner must have
a rational understanding of the reason for his execution and the effect of his execution before the state puts him to
the doctor assessing his mental state, claimed that there was
death (Arceneaux 1). The Supreme Court refused to grant a
nothing wrong with him, and he was adept to stand trial.
stay in the execution, which created great controversy.
Although he was deemed acceptable to stand trial, Daniel
The United States has a certain standard to uphold, for the sake of its citizens, the quality of life, and justice. The
notably makes incoherent sounds, as well as clucking noises
country claims to be a place of freedom and fairness,
throughout the trial (Stevenson 190). Clearly, Daniel is unable to
however, for those who can offer proper defense. The
stand his trial, which makes him ineffective as a defendant, and
justice system has failed in many ways, and it is crucial to change the way the death penalty is handled. Mentally ill
affects his sentence. Similarly, in the case of Robert Ladd, a man
people, convicted of heinous murders, require a form of
with an IQ of 67, was executed in early 2015. In the court case,
punishment, however do not deserve to die. Every time the
Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that those with an IQ below 70, are exempt from receiving the death penalty, as they are mentally inept to make coherent decisions. However, the Supreme Court rejected Ladd’s appeals and was executed.
justice system fails to protect the rights of a citizen, the ideals of freedom are undermined. Those who are mentally ill, are unable to defend their rights, because they are unequipped with the mental capacity to do so. The United States’ duty is to exercise justice, and provide fair and just punishment. However the justice system is not endowed with the privilege to play God.