Imagine you are now sequestered in a jury room to debate the verdict in the trial with your fellow jurors. The goal is to reach a consensus, so once enough people have stated their verdicts, you can then begin to debate with those who disagree with you.
Reaching a verdict in a situation like this involves complex processes of reasoning and decision making. In your discussion with the other jurors, you must decide if the evidence indicates, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant should have anticipated the destructive consequences of his behavior. In other words, did the defendant (Mary Barnett) knowingly leave her child unattended? When she left the state, did she recognize her incapacitated condition or did she deliberately abandon her child? Should she have been able to anticipate that terrible consequences might result if she left her child alone? The principle of beyond a reasonable doubt is difficult to define in specific terms, but in general the principle means that it would not make good sense for thoughtful men and women to conclude otherwise. Based on your analysis of the evidence and arguments presented in this case, briefly write your verdict and outline your reasons for reaching this conclusion.
Assignment
For this discussion, do the following:
- Post your verdict and the reasons you hold it.
- Then, find someone else who disagrees with you, and try to counterargue their claim. Use counterargument and refutation strategies from the previous pages.
Refute it. Raise some doubt in their mind. Question the credibility of the evidence. Question the logic. Question everything and try to get someone to budge. It isn’t easy. And remember, insulting or attacking people is probably the worst way to win an argument. It’s certainly the best way to lose the argument and your audience. Respectful, reasoned argument in a convincing tone that demonstrates sensitivity, audience-awareness, and respect for your reader or listener is the best way to win an argument and keep your audience’s attention.
Keep in mind that a full two sections of Essay #1 (and sections in all the essays in this class, for that matter) are summaries and refutations of opposing arguments; counterargument such as this is an integral part of writing an argument (as opposed to writing an essay that merely states your position). The goal of an argument is to persuade your readers to change their mind–in this case about the verdict in the trial. So this is great place to practice your ability to change minds.
