Writing Assignment- Critical Thinking- Has Justice Been Served?

 

Order Number			45471455714
Type of Paper			Essay
Writer Classification Level			Undergraduate
Style of Writing			MLA/APA/CHICAGO/
Sources and References			5
Number of Pages			4
Paper Instructions Description Before we get to the technicalities of this term’s paper assignment, some review of a handful of items is in order. Go back and review my first (1 of 2) set of Notes on Chapters 1 and 2 from my Elements of Knowledge, paying special attention to the subjects of deduction and induction. In the paper assignment, following, you will see that we’re dealing with a fictional criminal murder trial, one in which we are acting as defense counsel. Here’s the point: in criminal procedure, for the prosecution to win, or “prevail,” then in theory at least the prosecution must aim at deductive certainty. No doubts, no “if’s”; no probabilities. This is realized by having all twelve jurors vote “guilty.” No exceptions. 100%. If even one juror votes “not guilty” and will not change this vote, the prosecution will fail to prevail. And, by the way, “innocent” means you didn’t do it, but “not guilty” means the prosecution cannot prove that you did. And “proof,” in this instance, means 100% certainty. And you can easily see why, especially in murder trials, we must have, for a guilty verdict, 100% certainty securely in place. Depending on which state you live in, the resulting verdict may deal in capital punishment or life imprisonment. Grim finalities. But now, the defense counsel (in this case, us), will be perfectly happy in dealing with inductive probability. In fact, the function of any defense counsel, in a criminal proceeding, is to introduce doubt into the juror’s minds. If such doubt cannot be erased by the prosecution, the defense will prevail. So here is the place to contrast criminal procedure with “civil” procedure (lawsuits), thus: criminal procedure, for a guilty verdict, must deal in certainty. But to get a guilty verdict in a civil case, only a majority of the jury + one is needed. Now, take another look at the first set (1of 2) of my Notes over Chapters 3 and 4 from Elements of Knowledge, paying special attention to the section on Peirce’s “beans” illustrations of Deduction, Induction, and Abduction. Especially when it is pointed out that, in these illustrations, the content of each is exactly the same as the other two. The difference between them lies in the form or design or structure of each. What’s the point? Well, in criminal trials there is an aspect known as “discovery,” wherein, in theory at least, we are secure in thinking that prosecution and defense alike work from exactly the same evidence, or content. It is by the differences in their reasoning processes, deduction vs. induction, the forms by with which they shape or mold the evidence at hand, that they arrive at such different conclusions. One side, certainty; the other side, something less strict. Abduction, or guesswork, is certainly in play for both sides, particularly as they begin to form up their cases. Lastly, now, before engaging the details of your paper, “Has Justice Been Served,” consider my second set (2 of 2) Notes over Chapters 3 & 4 from Elements of Knowledge. There you see a discussion of the so-called ad hominem fallacy: arguments against the person, regardless of the “message” the person carries or delivers. This is the central subject of your paper. For as you will see, prosecution and defense alike share the same damning evidence against our client, which leaves us, it seems as the defense counsel, but one option to attempt for a “not guilty” verdict, that being to invoke a vicious ad hominem attack in an attempt to fatally discredit the character of the eyewitness put forward by the prosecution, who swears under oath that she saw our client commit the murder in question. * * * * * Writing Assignment in Critical Thinking Has Justice Been Served? – – – – – In, at most, five pages of clearly written prose text (one side per sheet, only; Garamond 12-pt. type, double spaced, preferred), please address the critical issues in the following fictional passage, and do so through the questions supplied following the passage itself. The material on the is page, then, is the “subject” portion of the assignment. More formatting, Core Rubric and grading information on following page. In this assignment, you are asked, in the context of a capital murder trial to think like the Judge , then like an individual Juror, and finally as a member of the Jury, a member of the general Public . – – – – – Text: Here we are confronted with a capital murder trial, one in which prospects for the Defendant do not look very promising. The Defendant, our client, is accused of shooting the deceased in the Mall parking lot one sunny afternoon, at very close range and in the head, with a .357 Magnum revolver. Most if not all the factual evidence seems clearly against our client, including the testimony of an alleged eye-witness to the murder, a Ms. Smith, by name. Among other maneuvers to counter such evidence overall, we intend to discredit Ms. Smith’s character by asking her, under oath, if it is or is not true that she is a prostitute and a dealer in illegal drugs. Our aim here is to play upon the egotistical conscience of a certain juror, a Mr. Jones, by name, hoping he will vote not guilty in this case because he fundamentally wishes to avoid the embarrassment of having to admit to his wife, his children, his business associates and his religious colleagues that he in practical effect voted, in this case, to execute our client based on the testimony of a morally corrupt and debased witness. Think here as would a Judge , in such an instance. Questions (to be answered in continuous prose text): What kinds of seemingly damning factual evidence could the Prosecutor bring against our client? What are the advantages and the disadvantages of the Prosecution bringing forward the eye- witness, Ms. Smith? What makes bringing forward eye-witness testimony a risky maneuver? If the Prosecution is to prevail, is there any particular kind of reasoning that the Prosecution must use to organize and present all the damning factual evidence mentioned above? Can the evidence in play be cast in another kind of reasoning that the Defense could use, and in such a way as to dismiss or jeopardize the value of all or part(s) of this evidence? When Ms. Smith’s character is attacked, which fallacy of relevance is involved? What should be the reaction of the Prosecution? Formatting Information: typescript required, double-space all. Garamond 12-pt. typescript preferred. Staple together at upper left. Also at upper left, first page: Title of Essay – Your name plus student i.d. number Dr. (blank) – Philosophy & Section Number – Fall 2020 The Center for Philosophical Studies at (Blank) University – Date of Submission Core Rubric Information: On the last page of your essay, at the left margin and in bold type, enter Criteria (personal and social responsibility). Then, in no more space than your last page, discuss the personal and social responsibility issues in this trial as if you were a Juror in this trial. . Thus, given what you, personally, as a juror, know about the evidence involved, would you individually feel compelled to vote for conviction or acquittal? And at the larger level of social responsibility, as a member of the Jury/Public , and, again, using the information made available in this trial, should society at large approve of a conviction, leading certainly to capital punishment in this case, or allow an acquittal, certainly saving the accused’s life?
	Distinguished (100%)	Proficient (85%)		Basic (70%)	Below Expectations (50%)	Non-Performance (0%)
Thesis Statement	Raises the strongest   objection to the thesis presented in the assignment. The objection is strongly grounded in research and logical reasoning.	Raises a plausible objection to the thesis presented in the assignment. The objection is mostly grounded in research and logical reasoning.		Raises an objection to the thesis presented in the assignment. The objection is somewhat grounded in research and logical reasoning.	Attempts to raise an objection to the thesis presented in the assignment. The objection is minimally grounded in research and logical reasoning.	The objection to the thesis is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Counter Argument	Provides a strong, thorough rebuttal to the objection. The rebuttal effectively demonstrates that the thesis can withstand the objection and applies the principles of charity and accuracy.	Provides a rebuttal to the objection. The rebuttal mostly demonstrates that the thesis can withstand the objection and mostly applies the principles of charity and accuracy.		Provides a limited rebuttal to the objection. The rebuttal somewhat demonstrates that the thesis can withstand the objection and somewhat applies the principles of charity and accuracy.	Attempts to provide a rebuttal to the objection; however, the rebuttal minimally demonstrates that the thesis can withstand the objection and does not apply the principles of charity and accuracy.	The rebuttal is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Conclusion	Provides clear and concise closing remarks that comprehensively summarize the essay. The remarks consider the broader controversy and/or further research that could offer additional insight into the moral solution of the business problem.	Provides closing remarks that summarize the essay. The remarks mostly consider the broader controversy and/or further research that could offer additional insight into the moral solution of the business problem. The closing remarks are somewhat unclear.		Provides closing remarks that minimally summarizes the essay. The remarks minimally consider the broader controversy and/or further research that could offer additional insight into the moral solution of the business problems. The closing remarks are unclear and/or vague.	Attempts to provide closing remarks that summarize the essay; however, the remarks do not consider the broader controversy and/or further research that could offer additional insight into the moral solution of the business problem. The closing remarks are unclear and vague.	The closing remarks are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.
Written Communication: Context of and Purpose for Writing	Demonstrates methodical application of organization and presentation of content. The purpose of the writing is evident and easy to understand. Summaries, quotes, and/or paraphrases fit naturally into the sentences and paragraphs. Paper flows smoothly.	Demonstrates sufficient application of organization and presentation of content. The purpose of the writing is, for the most part, clear and easy to understand. There are some problems with the blending of summaries, paraphrases, and quotes. Paper flows somewhat smoothly.		Demonstrates a limited understanding of organization and presentation of content in written work. The purpose of the writing is somewhat evident but may not be integrated throughout the assignment. There are many problems with the blending of summaries, paraphrases, and quotes. Paper does not flow smoothly in all sections.	Organization and presentation of content are extremely limited. The purpose of the writing is unclear. There is little or no blending of summaries, paraphrases, and quotes. Paper does not flow smoothly when read.	The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Control of Syntax and Mechanics	– Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors and is very easy to understand.	Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors and is mostly easy to understand		Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors which may slightly distract the reader.	Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors which distract the reader.	The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Required Formatting	Accurately uses required formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.	Exhibits required formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors.		Exhibits limited knowledge of required formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all requirements.	Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of required formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as required style.	The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Word Requirement	The length of the paper is equivalent to the required number of words.	The length of the paper is nearly equivalent to the required number of words.		The length of the paper is equivalent to at least three quarters of the required number of words.	The length of the paper is equivalent to at least one half of the required number of words.	The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Written Communication: Resource Requirement	Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.	Uses the required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.		Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.	Uses an inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.	The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.