A time to kill response- Nuala Brennan

1. In a normal situation, I would say that Carl Lee did not get justice by killing the boys. However, due to the fact that the boys would have been fond not-guilty, I think it was good that Carl Lee took matters into his own hands and murdering them was the most justice he could have gotten.
2. Carl Lee commits the crime because he was hurting and he wanted revenge on the boys for what they did to his daughter. He wanted justice when he knew it would not be served due to how racist the Mississippi courts are.
3. I don't think Carl Lee should be punished, what he went through with his daughter is punishment enough and I think those boys deserved it.
4. The scales of justice are nowhere near balanced. The justice system is completely ruled by white racists and the fact that the KKK had so much involvement in the case shows that. Even the jury was primarily white. If Brigance's request to move the trial to another town had been granted, then there may be more equality in the justice system, but even then it cannot be confirmed. If the scales were balances, Carl Lee would have never had to believe it was his duty to take justice into his own hands and he would have never had to kill the boys because they would have been found guilty.
5. In the movie and in the south it does matter that she is black because people are racist and thinks that she is lesser/non-human/deserved it. In real life, it does not matter that Tanya was black because she is still a human and should be treated equal to everybody else. The crime that she was a victim of was the same and just as brutal regardless of her race.
6. Due process did not work in Carl Lee's favor because he did not have a fair jury. There were no other people of color on the jury and there were racists there rooting against him. For most white people, that jury could be considered fair because it represents the defendant, but not for Carl Lee.

Nuala Brennan