Commentaire du texte "A lawyer's speech"

Publié le 2 févr. 2019 il y a 16 jours par aurore.eyal - Fin › 4 févr. 2019 dans 13 jours
7.00 / 20
1

Sujet du devoir

Boujour !

Je dois écrire un texte en anglais, pourriez-vous m'aider avec les fautes de grammaire, de vocabulaire ou de conjugaison ?

Merci pour votre temps et votre attention.

 

This document is a lawyer’s speech extracted from the movie “Dead Man Walking” directed by Tim Robbins. It takes place during the trial of Matthew Poncelet’s sentenced to death.

 

When the lawyer begins his speech, he sharply criticizes the fate already decided of the poor defendants. Even if they face the same judicial system than a wealthy person, they can’t pay a well-known lawyer. Money is a game changing.

 

His client, Matthew, was in this situation, he had a public defender. To make matters worse, he was inexperienced. He may have not wanted to take such a case because it appeared to him a non-win situation.

Indeed, as the lawyer correctly points out, it was a very short trial, it took the jury only 4 hours to bring Matthew in guilty. He never had a chance to win the trial. He might have felt powerless, misunderstoods, and desperate.

Whereas, if he could have paid experienced professionals, he would have been advised and supported.

 

Then, the lawyer tries to appeal to the emotion of the jurors, by referring to what is the death penalty. He recalls the former ways to kill in history, now considered as merciless and inhumane practices. Afterwards, he presents with irony the lethal injunctions as “a device that is the most human of all”, at least, only apparently.

In fact, if the convict seems quiet and relaxed, it’s only thanks to the first shot which anesthetize him. Inside his body, it’s a different story, his muscles twist, convulse, and implode. It’s only after the third shot that he died.

 

Beyond the fact that the lawyer defends Matthew’s case, it’s a powerful advocacy against the death penalty. In point of fact, capital punishment is a debatable topic. In my opinion, nothing is ever all right or all wrong. There are plenty of reasons against it: mistakes in judgments could be made in court, for example. Moreover, can a man have the right of life and death over an another ? Nevertheless, people can also think that it’s the only way to feel better and get revenge, the inmate won’t hurt again. I think that it depends on each individual case, people and what is important to you.   

 




0 commentaire pour ce devoir



Il faut être inscrit pour aider

Crée un compte gratuit pour aider

Je m'inscrisOU

J'ai déjà un compte

Je me connecte