Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
First of all, every person has the right to be defended in front of a court. I believe it is simply the right of every citizen to get the chance to show his side of the story. Even when the person is unquestionably guilty this does not mean that the person should not be defended. There is a fine line between bullying people and showing that a person is guilty. Also, other things might have caused the murdering or committed crime. For example a person may have been in depression or under the influence of drugs when they committed murder. Even just trying to get free of this person’s mind games or oppression will give the whole case a new twist. Without a defender this person might get the same years like a cold blooded murderer would. Or another example would be how a person smuggles drugs to another country for drug dealers in order to gain a living and reach a new nation. People always have a motivation behind their actions, and maybe the defended can just bring this out into the light to show how the person risked everything, even their freedom for the chance of a better life. Sometimes even a person could be innocent but convicted guilty. This person needs a defendant for sure, even though in everybody’s eyes they have done the crime. Of course sometimes these things can back-fire with mafia bosses and real life criminals slipping out of the net like a wet fish, but this does not keep up with the justice we give to a man who can prove his innocence through his representation in court.
7) Received pronunciation and acceptable grammar are an inclination of one’s intellect.
No, I totally do not agree with this. People with bad grammar might have just been taught that way or never received a really good education. Maybe its not their mother tongue, where it, they could maybe dazzle you with intellectual talk. Sadly many people do judge by people’s way of speaking and grammar. Often people are even bullied or laughed at because of their accents and mistakes in a language. But one must not forget that unlike people have different weakness and sometimes it might be languages. Maybe a person can do a mathematical equation so fast it will make your head spin but can’t pronounce the word capricious. Even people born with a slight or strong stutter can’t be said to have no intellect. They where born with the exact brain as everybody else only they have problem with words. Doesn’t mean he can’t do physics. It all depends on the person. When getting nervous certain type of people stutter or start to make no sense. If I get nervous, my whole sentence structure and ideas sound like jelly! I can understand that it can get annoying when a person can’t tell she and he apart or give a verb the totally wrong conjugation, but that just the way it is. No one is perfect and saying that a person is not the smartest cookie in the world due to their way of speaking is close to discrimination, only through words.
8) If the court system fails society, then society should take law into its own hands.
I cannot disagree with this statement more, simply by the horrific picture it entails. If a murder fails to be locked up, should society kill him? A woman who wants to be divorced should be stoned to death? I believe different cultures will view things differently but I still think the folk should really not do anything in haste. A nation needs order and a set of rules. If these rules aren’t followed chaos will erupt. All people who believe a jury decided wrong will try to change the verdict and put it into their own hands. Even the jury decided fair some person will still think it was wrong! Nobody would be safe anymore, gangs could start popping up. There is a reason to all this slow yet thoughtful process. Actions in haste will never resolute to anything good in the long run. Another problem with this statement is where is the limit? It can be taken from a warning, to a threat, to killing and everybody will think they are in the right, for opinions are as numerous as the stars above. Taking it back to the jury or protesting is the right way to change a verdict. Taking the slow yet through-through way of our nations is the right way to keep order, find justice, and gain the faultless balance between justice and social murder.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Then, of course there was the candelabra, the pride and joy of the Doctor. Standing upon the mantelpiece, covered in blood red candles with screaming florescent green crystals. Holders molded into complicated agonized swirls of gold, and above it all the glorified portrait of the Doctor. Sadly no one saw, no one heard, the creak of the candelabra’s turning, the sliding of a wall. Only the Doctor, his faithful assistant Sashkin, and the unlucky Elder upon this night, saw the truth of the matter. Yet this is where the story begins.
Uhov, often taken to the nightly experiments of the Doctor, breaks free from the clutches of Sashkin and escapes. A lone figure in a bleak landscape, he stumbles upon Sasha. Sasha, a reporter, has never had luck in his life yet the night Uhov lands before his feet, he knows he has got the story he was waiting for. Gratitude of a well fed body and believing mind, Uhov tells his story, and the horrors come alive.
Will Sasha find out the truth before Sashkin finds them? Sashkin will do everything to cover his embarrassment of losing Uhov. But is he ready to murder? The clock is ticking as the race begins.To Sasha’s happiness, it seems as if luck has finally found him and he has no problem to uncover the truth. The Doctor has mishandled the Elders in his home, using them for gruesome experiments of a most evil nature. Alarmed by his find, Sasha notifies the police. The Doctor and Sashkin are put behind bars. The Elders, traumatized by their experience are being helped as much as possible.
Sadly, Sasha is the only one to return to the haunted home. Beholding the candelabra, Sasha smashes against it and the secret entrance behind. Where he is stuck, from now until forevermore.