Erin Brockovich is a mum with three kids, in desperate need of a job, not a piece of paper saying she owes compensation for damages. Erin is trying her hardest to provide the best for her children and by this you can tell she is a great mother who shouldn’t be judged on how much debt she has or how many relationships she has had in the past. Since when did someone’s past define their justice? Is it right to judge someone standing right in front of you based upon information about their personal life. It’s not at all surprising that you think the doctor is telling the truth. As he is a qualified medical practitioner and knows the degree of injury involved due to car crashes, so why would anyone believe he would instigate one? Although the defendant has lots of money due to his occupation and can therefor afford to be represented by top lawyers does not mean that he is automatically not liable. It just means he has the ability to pay a lawyer to do the work for him, where as Erin can’t afford to hire some “top lawyer” as her priority is trying to provide food on the table every night for her children. Don’t let this unequal representation fool you. Did any of you notice the fact that Erin was courageous enough to stand up there and represent herself? Probably knowing full well she was going to lose, but stood up there regardless and was not going to go down without a fight. When did it become so wrong to fight for one’s own justice? I’m a juror that analyses every fact of the case, not just someone basis my thoughts and decisions on someone’s social standings in society. If you all would just see past her social status and her occupation, you would see the logic and truth behind her side of the story. We are here to do a service, and here to guarantee our justice system doesn’t fail these people in our community, yet someone’s social status has become the focus in this courtroom. Where is the equality in all of this? Who is to say the doctor is innocent...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document