Criminal Law and Monster Essay

In the book giant scripted by Walter Dean Myers, Steve Harmon is convicted of a felony murder. As a particle of the dialog box in my eyes Steve Harmon is not guilty. Three reasonings behind my reliance are that they lease no show that he was in that respect at the time of the crime, there is no probable causa to link him to the crime, and completely the evidence says he was not there.First reasoning is that they have no evidence that he was there. The only evidence that they have is the former(a) convicted characters formulation he was a look out, but there was someone in the interpose when he left. So with that being tell he wasnt really a look out because he didnt make sure there wasnt anyone in the store and the lady in the store didnt say she saw him.Second, there wasnt any probable cause to link him to the case, the only social function that linked him to the case was that he knew the people that committed the crime. Also Steve didnt get anything that was stolen fr om the store. That led me to believe that he wasnt part of it because if he was part of it he would have gotten either money, smokes or anything else they took.Last, all the evidence says he was not there. There wasnt any one saying he was there. The only people who said he was there are the people that were getting a break and they were told the situation. Some of the convicted didnt regular know who Steve was. This led me to believe he was innocent.In the book Monster written by Walter Dean Myers, Steve Harmon is convicted of a felony murder. As a member of the jury in my eyes Steve Harmon is not guilty. The reasonings behind my conviction are that they have no evidence that he was there at the time of the crime, there is no probable cause to link him to the crime, and all the evidence says he was not there. All this together made me pick out not guilty.