differences between moral law and secular law, and the implications of combining the two
-
differences between guilt by evidence as opposed to guilt by association.
-
how laws for the public good can be made to further personal interests of specific individuals
the role of individual power and status in establishing guilt or innocence
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Reflection
Pick one of the following topics and discuss in reference to events in The Crucible. Your submission should be at least 200 words. Use necessary outside resources.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
the difference between guilt with evidence as opposed to guilt by association. the guilt by evidence is that they have with what to accuse you of witch craft. and by guilt with association they don't have any evidence to accuse you
ReplyDeleteI’m going over the topic “ Guilty by evidence as opposed to guilty by association”. I believe that guilty by evidence is when someone has evidence on you or whatever they need to have evidence on & your found guilty to it. Guilty by association is when you are found guilty for something someone else did but you were with them at the time of the crime. I feel that guilty by association isn’t right because why should you get punished for something someone else did? It is all kind of ridiculous if you ask me. In the book, The Crucible, an example of guilt by evidence is when Tituba was caught dancing with the Devil. An example of guilty by association is when Abigail & Betty were accused of witch craft because they were both with Tituba in the woods at the time. Reverand Parris felt that it was all wrong because they shouldn’t have been in the woods, naked anyway. Betty was knocked out for a long time but when she did wake up, she confessed that Tituba & Abigail were in the woods dancing with the Devil. A lot of times, you have to watch who you surround yourself with because they can get you into a lot of trouble.
ReplyDeleteGuilty by evidence vs. guilty by association. when your guilty by evidence its probably because the "law" have evidence that proves your involvement in the crime, usually because they found a finger print, something that you dropped, your DNA, or what ever. In the crucible Elizabeth is guilty by evidence even though it was "planted" evidence.
ReplyDeleteGuilty by association is usually when your proven guilty because your seen with people or because of what yours seen doing that makes you look guilty.John was guilty by association because he is Elizabeth’s husband and tries so hard to prove that she’s innocent and later tries to prove that almost everyone is innocent.
like guilt by evidence was like how they accused john proctor of witch craft and a association like when they accused elizabeth of being a witch craft and they didn't do nothing to her. and only proctor died with a association. they didn't have evidence.
ReplyDeleteThe difference between guilt by evidence and guilt by association is guilt by evidence is they need evidence to prove that you’re guilty or that you were there. If they don’t have evidence then they wont charge you and go to jail. In the crucible Tituba was guilty by evidence because she was the one doing the witchcraft. The other girls were guilty by association because they were just there; they weren’t actually doing the witchcraft. Abigail was guilty by evidence because she was doing witchcraft to get rid of Elizabeth and get John back. Abigail confessed dancing in the forest but not doing the witchcraft then she started accusing other people of witchcraft to get rid of her guilt.
ReplyDeleteevidence is when you get caught on tape or there is proof you did something guilt by association mean you seen every thing but didn't say anything but now your guilty. in the crucible the characters where in things together. like when abigual drank the chicken blood every one who seen it were guilty by association
ReplyDeleteThe role of individual power and status in establishing guilt or innocence
ReplyDeleteWell in my opinion Abigail was like that cause at the end she finds out how big and strong her power is because of al; the stuff she did. She had all of those women and proctor under control cause she told them that she would say the truth about them all like when proctor and Abigail had a talk and proctor told Abigail to say the truth about her being a witch and she said no that if she did she was going to tell everyone that she and his and an affair.
The difference between guilt. You can be guilty by a lot of ways though only certain people agree with one of them or the other. One of them is guilt with evidence of opposed which is that your guilty if there’s evidence to back it up like a finger print or a weapon that you have might used on a crime or a picture of you doing something that your not supposed to. I think this kind of guilt is the most reasonable because there are things to prove that you did what there accusing you of and there are not just lien just because they don’t like you a lot of people have done that even today they lie about things just to get you in trouble. The other type of guilt is guilt by association this is when you if your with someone and the person your with does something wrong and you don’t do nothing to stop it then that makes you guilty of a crime that you didn’t do. I think this one don’t make sense because if you didn’t do nothing if you were just there then you shouldn’t be accused of nothing. Then in that case everyone who saw the crime then they should be guilty as well to.
ReplyDeleteI think that if you decide to be with someone that is doing crime, then it’s fair because if you are with them as they are doing the crime then you are an assessor to it. How ever than again it wouldn’t be fair because a lot of times people are in the crime un-expected and they of course get tried for it as well as if they were involved in it like they had a purpose. The authorities and court see’s things as if you were to plan it and of course do it. But what they sometime don’t realize is that not a lot of people do crimes. People get set up and people get involved without even knowing the assailant, for instance. A criminal goes up to a random person at gunpoint and threaten to kill them or someone else if they don’t do what they say, what do you expect is going to happen? As you know they would try to get a layer to try to defend them, but the court and jury would see this as a regular crime and a see the hostage and original criminal. Sure you here the phrase ‘’ at the wrong place at the wrong time’’. But it’s not fair. It reminds me of the book in cold blood because of the killers. One was actually a good guy, had three boys and even though he was devoured twice he still was a pretty good person. The other had a bad childhood and history and was not a very good person. Now in this situation the charges and consequences were fair because when to two got together they went and killed the clutter family. Things like this deserve a fair sentence because as you see the good person with a family got with the bad person that were doing the crimes and they both end up doing something that shocked the world. So in conclusion, the way the system goes it’s fair but then again it’s not but you have to have the right evidence.
ReplyDelete