Unit VII Essay Think Piece A Time to Kill
Waldorf University
Critical thinking
I think Carl Lee was right in that he knew several things about not only the proposed jury but
about his own lawyer. Carl Lee visited Jake after his daughter was raped and asked about another
case in which 4 white boys raped a black girl and got away with it. Carl Lee used without even
realizing it Fallacies of Relevance for his case. Appeal to Pity is one of the fallacies of relevance
that is “a fallacious argument appeal for support to factors that have little or nothing to do with
the argument being offered” (Chaffee, 2019, p. 481). Carl Lee made an appeal to Jake in that if 2
men raped his little daughter, he would have done the same thing. However, even if his reasons
were true, they were not relevant to the conclusion. The key issue is that this argument’s main
purpose is to make you feel sorry for the person and that you would agree with them out of pity.
Since these arguments appeal to the heart in many cases they are very effective but not sound.
Jake told Carl Lee that they were going to lose the case and that he should take plea deal and
Carl Lee told jake that he thinks just like the jury and that is why he picked him. He feels that he
could not get a fair trail as a black man with an all-white jury. I do not believe Carl Lee believed
Jake was his enemy or as one of the bad guys after all he had done for him and how much he
gave up taking his case. But Carl Lee wanted Jake to think like the jury and what it would take
for the jury to acquit him. Carl Lee felt that Jake and the jury does not see him as a man, but as a
black man and that is a big difference. Carl Lee believes that a black man could ever get a fair
trial from an all-white jury and that Jake was the same way. Although it was effective, I do not
think carl lee was right in his summation of Jake. It is no way that Carl Lee knows that every
juror or Jake would only see him as a black man.
Waldorf University
Critical thinking
I think Carl Lee was right in that he knew several things about not only the proposed jury but
about his own lawyer. Carl Lee visited Jake after his daughter was raped and asked about another
case in which 4 white boys raped a black girl and got away with it. Carl Lee used without even
realizing it Fallacies of Relevance for his case. Appeal to Pity is one of the fallacies of relevance
that is “a fallacious argument appeal for support to factors that have little or nothing to do with
the argument being offered” (Chaffee, 2019, p. 481). Carl Lee made an appeal to Jake in that if 2
men raped his little daughter, he would have done the same thing. However, even if his reasons
were true, they were not relevant to the conclusion. The key issue is that this argument’s main
purpose is to make you feel sorry for the person and that you would agree with them out of pity.
Since these arguments appeal to the heart in many cases they are very effective but not sound.
Jake told Carl Lee that they were going to lose the case and that he should take plea deal and
Carl Lee told jake that he thinks just like the jury and that is why he picked him. He feels that he
could not get a fair trail as a black man with an all-white jury. I do not believe Carl Lee believed
Jake was his enemy or as one of the bad guys after all he had done for him and how much he
gave up taking his case. But Carl Lee wanted Jake to think like the jury and what it would take
for the jury to acquit him. Carl Lee felt that Jake and the jury does not see him as a man, but as a
black man and that is a big difference. Carl Lee believes that a black man could ever get a fair
trial from an all-white jury and that Jake was the same way. Although it was effective, I do not
think carl lee was right in his summation of Jake. It is no way that Carl Lee knows that every
juror or Jake would only see him as a black man.
