Argumentative Essay Example on U.S. Criminal Justice System

“Each of us is more than the worst thing we’ve ever done” (Stevenson 17). That is the one vital lesson Bryan Stevenson learned from his work. The U.S. criminal justice system judges people very unfairly and often based on their worst. The U.S. criminal justice system judges people based on their worst in many ways such as not considering people's personal backgrounds, giving the judge the ability to overrule an entire jury, and not looking into cases enough leading to negative assumptions.

First of all, I think that the U.S. criminal justice system doesn't consider people's personal backgrounds that led them to do what they did. Many people come from very troubling pasts that led them to do what they did. For example, in the book Just Mercy, Charlie was sentenced to jail for murder; however, they never considered his background with George, the man he murdered. George was Charlie's mother's boyfriend who constantly abused her. The night George was killed, Charlie found his mother laying on the ground close to death because of George (Stevenson 96-104). In this situation, the police never took into account what George had been doing to Charlie's mom. They should have considered George and Charlie’s mother’s relationship. Even though Charlie wasn't being hurt, they should’ve considered how he felt. While Charlie did do the action out of pure anger and he did deserve to be arrested, they did not consider some pieces of information that they should have.

Secondly, judges have the power to overrule the jury. While this is less of showing how the criminal justice system judges people based on their worst, it shows how the criminal justice system judges people incredibly unfairly. Even if the jury makes a unanimous decision that a convict is innocent, the judge has the power to overrule them and declare the convict guilty. For example, in the book Just Mercy, the jury sentenced Michael Lindsay to life in prison without parole, however, the judge overruled it and instead sentenced him to death row (Stevenson 67). This is incredibly unfair, and I think that the judge shouldn't have the power to do that. In this story, the judge used their power to overrule the jury and send Michael to death row to seem "tough on crime" so they would get reelected. If the criminal justice system in the U.S. were to be fair, I think that the judge shouldn't have the power to overrule the jury that easily, especially if it is for small pointless, unreasonable reasons such as the one presented in the book.

Finally, I believe that the judge or jury comes to conclusions without learning enough about the case and just making assumptions, which often happen to be negative.  For example, in the book Just Mercy, Walter McMillian is arrested and put on death row for a murder he did not commit. He had a solid alibi, for he was at a fish fry with over 20 witnesses, however, the judge and police decided to ignore that piece of information and arrest him, for he was the only suspect due to a white man named Ralph Meyers, claiming that he had killed the victim. The police and jury decided to listen to one man instead of over 20 witnesses (Stevenson 30-51). This is a very strong example of how the judge can often come to conclusions without looking deep enough into the case. They just used the first and quickest piece of information they could come by, even if that information wasn't true.

In conclusion, I think that ways that the U.S. criminal justice system judges people based on their worst by not considering people's personal backgrounds, giving the judge the power to completely overrule the jury, and how judges often come to conclusions by not learning enough about cases and making negative assumptions. The U.S. criminal justice system often judges people based on their worst, and very rarely on their best.