An appeal for Tom Robinson should include the fact that the case should never have been tried in court because of the lack of substantial evidence and credible witnesses. First, court hearings and trials should be held only if there is substantial proof that a crime was committed. Since Mr. Ewell didn't call a doctor to examine his daughter Mayella, there is no scientific or professional proof to show that she was actually raped. As...
An appeal for Tom Robinson should include the fact that the case should never have been tried in court because of the lack of substantial evidence and credible witnesses. First, court hearings and trials should be held only if there is substantial proof that a crime was committed. Since Mr. Ewell didn't call a doctor to examine his daughter Mayella, there is no scientific or professional proof to show that she was actually raped. As far as witnesses are concerned, the sheriff, Heck Tate, was called in after the fact; but he is neither a doctor nor a primary witness to the crime. Although his testimony is credible in regards to what happened after the alleged crime, he cannot account completely for what happened on the Ewell property during the event of the crime in question. The sheriff was simply the first to hear one side of the case. Furthermore, what one person says about another is not enough to prove that someone committed a crime and it's called hearsay. Hearsay is not admissible as evidence in any court of law. Bob and Mayella Ewell thought that all they had to do was call "wolf" and they would be believed. They were right. The people of Maycomb tried a man based in nothing more than hearsay and the prejudiced feelings of a controlling white population. Tom Robinson's case was based on hearsay rather than substantial proof or credible witnesses; therefore, the ruling in the case should be overturned.
No comments:
Post a Comment