Now that I am looking back on Tom Robinson's court case, I have seen what my decision has done to my family and I have heard what my friends and neighbors have to say about the ordeal. If I could go back in time, I would still make the decision to defend Tom Robinson. This decision is backed by many reasons of logic and my morals. Many decisions people make are decided on what suits themselves, they do not think of other people and how it may affect them or show them what is right and what is wrong.
I believe that defending Tom Robinson was the correct, moral action to take. If I did not take this case, I could never look at my children again (Lee 88). Many people say that I am a disgrace to the family for taking the case (Lee 83), however, I see it a little differently. In my eyes, I would be disgracing the family for not taking the case because it would not be just not to defend Tom Robinson since I knew that he was innocent.
Throughout the trial, I believed (and still do) that Mayella's father, Bob Ewell, beat her (Lee 187). When I cross-examined Mayella, I tried to get her to admit to this, but she still insisted that Tom Robinson raped her (Lee 187-188). If a person would look at the evidence on hand, they would know that this was not the case. First of all, Tom's left arm was crippled from being caught in a cotton gin (Lee 186). Considering the fact that she was bruised and beat on the right side of the face, this was not possibly an action from Tom. However, Bob Ewell was left handed, meaning that when he was hitting Mayella, he hit her along the right side of the face (Lee 177). Second of all, Tom was only trying to help Mayella with her chores around the house because no one else in the family would help her (Lee 191). Thirdly, why on this particular day, November 21st, were the children out of the house? Mayella told Tom that she had saved money for a whole year so she could treat them to ice cream (Lee 193). Also on that day, she...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document