Carter's story became famous, first due to a song by Bob Dylan (below), and later, a movie starring Denzel Washington. The song tells the story pretty well, too.
Read the obituary from this past weekend of Rubin 'Hurricane' Carter, and think about A) how the criminal justice system treated him, B) how YOU would want the justice to treat you if you had been accused of a crime (regardless of your guilty or innocence), and C) Why perhaps the literal interpretation 'an eye for an eye' might be problematic in Rubin Carter's case.
Reflect in the comments below.
Michelle Postolovskiy comment # 5
ReplyDeleteI think this song is about a guy who got blamed for a crime that he did not do. so its saying that a guy got accused of murder but he actually did not do it. There is also a protest going on that he only got arrested because he his black, even though he did not commit the crime(murder.) Carter is the victim of a crime that he did not do, which is like we have been talking about in class. This does not really relate to Talmud but its similar to the case in To Kill a Mocking Bird.
Aliya Lofland comment #6
DeleteI agree with Michelle. Carter was blamed because he was black, and racism was strong at that time, so it wouldn't be much of a big deal for a black person to go to jail. Rubin was blamed because there was no one else to blame, as many colored people were. I believe that he should not have been put in jail, and he most definitely should not have spent 14 years of his life in a jail cell, when he could have been ‘the champion of the world’. I also agree with Michelle on account of the fact that this case is comparable to the trial in To Kill A Mockingbird. In that book, a man named Tom Robinson was accused of raping a girl named Mayella. He did not really do that, but he was blamed for it because he was black, and there really was no mercy, no seeing the truth because he was black. The reason that both Rubin Carter and Tom Robinson were accused was because they were easy targets. They were black, so white people’s words would be worth more than their’s, even if they did not do anything punishable. We are all equal, it doesn't matter what color skin we have, or our gender. We should all be judged fairly, because we are all human beings
Sarah Brill Comment #5:
ReplyDeleteThe criminal justice system treated him unfairly. When Carter was convicted, black segregation was going on. Just like Jackie Robinson, Carter was discriminated just because he wanted to play a sport competitively with white men. Just like in To Kill a Mockingbird, Tom Robinson was accused of a crime he did not commit just because the white word was more liable than the blacks. I would want the criminal justice system to treat me as though I am any other person it shouldn't have mattered on the color of a person it should matter it whether a person is a criminal or not, or a person is just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Carter was in the wrong place at the wrong time, he was already getting death threats when he was a boxer because he was a black boxer, not to mention a really good one. Jackie Robinson was a black baseball player, he got death threats each day but he continued to play despite what other people said about him, just like Carter he tried to pursue his passion but he ended up in the wrong place at the wrong time and was convicted of a murder that he didn't commit just because his word was inferior to a black mans word. In the eye for an eye case, someone could actually charge someone literally or charge him or her with payment. One article I found on this topic was a CNN article on Michael Morton. This man was accused of killing his wife even though the man was at work. They charged him and suspected him because he was the closest to her and he would be able to easily kill her. This man lost 25 years of his life and his son to a crime he didn’t commit. The jury did not look at all the evidence and the result was prison. His son was forced to grow up with realities and he grew away from his father, so in a sense, Michael lost not only his wife and 25 years of his life, but also his son. This goes to show that when evidence is given, no matter who the person is or what he looks like, the man may be innocent. Our jury system is inaccurate at some points. Some juries look at all the evidence and some don’t. In Carters case, he got put in jail for a crime he didn’t commit and at that time the main reason the other man won, was because he was white and at the time, a white man’s’ word overruled that of a blacks. Both men were charged with a crime they didn’t commit, just because the jury didn’t look closer at the evidence given. The article I used was from: http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/04/justice/exonerated-prisoner-update-michael-morton/
Alex Gage comment #4
ReplyDeletethis man was innocent all the way through. It was the sixties and lots of racial prejudice was a common site in America. it said in the NY times article that there was suppression of evidence, racial prejudice, and his word not being trusted due to the color of his skin. all of this was wrong because as stated he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and could not do anything about it. It is sad and if I was ever caught up in this situation i would have liked to be treated as a normal human being and not discriminated because of my skin color or religion. We are all people and we are all entitled to human rights no matter who or what you did.
Sarah Pomerantz Comment #3
ReplyDeleteRubin Carter was accused of a crime he didn't commit. He spent 19 years of his life in jail. he was punished for something he didn't do until they dismissed the charges. I would have not put him in jail until he was proven guilty. He was basically charged before being proven guilty. He should have been watched closely until he was proven guilty instead of spending his life in punishment. An Eye for an Eye would have been a problem for Rubin Carter because if he was killed an then found innocent than he could not get his life back. Just like if someone cut someones arm off then and you were caused of it then when you were found innocent you could not get your arm back.
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/11/08/after-34-years-in-prison-for-murder-he-didnt-commit-man-walks-free/. This article is about a man that was accused of murder and spent 34 year in jail even though he didn’t commit the crime. He was recently released but there is no way that he will get 34 years of his life back. Things like this happen all the time where a person is wrongly committed and they spend years of their life in jail that they will never get back. The Rabbis would have a difficult time trying to figure out how they should watch a person during a trial especially for long amounts of time before being proven guilty or innocent.
in the book To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee Tom Robinson is falsely accused of raping a woman which we find out later it was her father who had beaten her and Tom Robinson had already been convicted of the crime. Tom Robinson was not sent to prison he was shot 17 times and killed. the charges were never dismissed like Rubin Carter was. As stated in the court case by Atticus finch on page 255 Tom was unable to commit the crime due to a disability/ fake evidence. I would have not put tom in jain because of the obvious cover up and obvious evidence
ReplyDeleteRubin Carter was one of the many people that get falsely accused based upon prejudice, rather than evidence. In the book "To Kill a Mockingbird" a black man was arrested (and killed) for beating and raping a white woman, despite evidence that proved that he was physically incapable of committing the crime due to a disability. Just like in the book, Carter was arrested for a crime, despite evidence that proved him innocent. Minorities are still treated unfairly in the justice system today. In this article http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/04/i-was-racially-profiled-in-my-own-driveway/360615/ Doug Glanville, a retired major league baseball player was questioned by a police man while shoveling snow outside of his house. The cop assumed that he did not own the house and asked if he was being paid by the owner to shovel his driveway. There is also the story of Henry Louis Gates who was arrested for breaking into his own home and the infamuos Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman case, which questioned the definition of self-defense and the influence of racial-profiling in the justice system. If I was accused of a crime, I would want the jury to consider all of the evidence, whether it helped or hurt my case and then make an informed decision based solely on the evidence rather than my race, religion or gender. The rule “An eye for an eye” would be problematic because a.) there was suppressed evidence proving him innocent and an eye for an eye only applies when an actual crime was commited and b.) he would have had to compensate for the crime by dying three times, which is physically impossible.
ReplyDeleteLaurel Esstman Comment #3
ReplyDeleteRubin "Hurricane" Cater, as everyone else stated he was falsely accused of a crime based on the color of his skin. Carter was a black male who was convicted of shooting 2 white men and one white women. The criminal justice system treated him poorly and unfairly. Even though racism still exists today it should be an aspect of how a case is judged. If i was in his shoes i would not stand for this. It isn't fair everyone should be treated the same! A literal eye for an eye would be problematic for him because A. he would of had to die, and B. who would kill him? if the other victims are already dead.
Evelin Arriaza Comment #4
ReplyDeleteI like what laurel said in her comment. She points out that someone would have to kill Rubin. When you think of the death penalty you think about how someone who killed someone else is being killed. But who is killing him? Lets say he gets the death penalty by the firing squad. I know its a couple people shooting until someone kills the person.The person who shot the accused, what happens to him? Why does he get to kill and no one kills him? Where is the eye for an eye in this case. Me pointing this out also bring up the fact that if you did get an eye for an eye in this case, it would be a never ending cycle of dead people.
The criminal "justice" system was clearly not being very just when it came to Rubin Carter. This case provokes the idea that not only does racism still exist, but it is a prominent cause to some people living in hell. Not only does an eye for an eye not apply to this case because Carter was innocent, but it would be so unpractical to take it literally. If Carter was guilty and an eye for an eye was in play, many people would end up dead, but since he was innocent, I agree with Evelin in that this case is not applicable.
ReplyDeleteSam Comment #3 A) I believe that Rubin Carter was treated unfairly, but that is an opinion that is almost unanimous between everyone who has heard about the case. That being said, and this may be the unpopular opinion, but B) If I was in the same circumstance, I would prefer that there are too many arrests than too few, and have criminals run free. I would hope that the American legal system would be able to weed out those that are innocent. And even if I was wrongly convicted, as Rubin Carter was, C) taking the literal meaning would mean that I or Rubin would die. Rather, we would both live, albeit in prison, however, we would still be living.
ReplyDelete