Writing Project 2
- First Draft Due
Monday, March 5, 2018
- Length
3-4 Pages
- Revision Due
Monday, March 12, 2018
The best laid schemes o’ Mice an’ Men
Gang aft agley,
An’ lea’e us nought but grief an’ pain,
For promis’d joy!
Robert Burns, “To a Mouse”
There’s an old saying: “the best laid plans of mice and men often go awry.” It comes from the poem excerpted above. The poem is about a farmer who accidentally destroys a mouse’s home while plowing a field. In the poem, the line has two meanings. The mouse’s best plans and hopes are ruined by the farmer, who she could neither predict nor control. But the farmer’s plans, too, have gone awry—thinking on the level of the field, the farmer’s actions had consequences that he did not intend. In the poem, the farmer apologizes not only for his mistake, but for the fact that the big ideas of humans have broken the trust among those who share this earth.
This semester, we’ve been examining the “justice” part of the American criminal justice system. We’ve been exploring the difficulties of turning “justice”—an abstract, complex moral concept—into a system of laws and people and politics, each with its own complexities. And in Mistrial, we’ve seen how in the courtroom, some of the big ideas that drive the system of criminal justice have (at least in Geragos and Harris’s opinion) gone far awry indeed.
For Writing Project 2, I’d like us to return to the philosophies of justice that we explored in Project 1. We’ll use those one of those philosophies to explore the and examine the problems pointed out in Mistrial.
Your Task
For this Writing Project, please write a 3-4 page paper about examining the arguments made in Mistrial. Please choose one of the philosophies of justice we discussed in Project 1. In your paper, please use examples from Mistrial to answer the following question:
Based on what you see in Mistrial, do the police and courts fulfill their purpose as defined by your chosen philosophy?
Remember, for this project we’re choosing one philosophy of justice to focus on and explore. Your purpose in this essay is to decide whether or not the courts as described by Geragos and Harris fulfill the purpose of justice, according to that philosophy. Our question is not whether it feels right and wrong in general, but whether the criminal justice system as Geragos and Harris describe it is doing what your philosophy of justice says it’s supposed to. (See below if this is a bit confusing.)
In order to do that, you’ll want to explore many different examples from the book. Please make sure to use summary, quotation, and paraphrase as you work with the book, and please make sure to include in-text citations as we’ve practiced in class.
Philosophies of Justice
- Retribution
- The purpose of the justice system is to make sure people suffer for the crimes they have committed.
-
Do prosecutors/defense attorneys/judges/cops/jurors/the media let people suffer for the crimes they’ve committed? Why or why not?
- Rehabilitation
-
The purpose of the justice system is to make sure people who have committed crimes do not do so again.
-
Do prosecutors/defense attorneys/judges/cops/jurors/the media make sure criminals don’t commit crimes again? Why or why not?
- Deterrence
-
The purpose of the justice system is to discourage people from committing crimes.
-
Do prosecutors/defense attorneys/judges/cops/jurors/the media discourage people from committing crimes? Why or why not?
- Restoration
-
The purpose of the justice system is to help criminals right the wrongs they have done and make it up to their victims.
-
Do prosecutors/defense attorneys/judges/cops/jurors/the media help criminals right their wrongs and make it up to the victims? Why or why not?