How Does A Time To Kill by John Grisham Make You Think About Justice in the World?

I grew up watching Law and Order: Special Victims Unit. It showed me that justice isn't always fair and that some people, when emotionally unstable, will take the law into their own hands and commit a crime. Now I learnt all that from watching a television show for almost five years.

The book A Time to Kill by John Grisham taught me the same exact thing but in a different way in a different time period. A Time to Kill takes place in the conservative and racist south, in Ford County, Mississippi, where 73 percent of the population is white and most of them are racist. A ten year old black girl gets viciously raped by two white men by the name of Willard and Billy Ray Cobb. While the two men were coming out of their indictment from court, Carl Lee, the father of the raped girl takes the law into his own hands and kills the two rapist in cold blood. Now he is in jail and waiting to get his indictment.

The book shows me that justice doesn't always mean fair. I’m only in the beginning of the book and I have already learnt that back in the day that whites could get easier punishments and get acquitted easier for murder than blacks. For example in the book Jake, Cobs’ white attorney says to Cobb:

“I’m white, and this is a white county. With luck I could get an all-white jury, which naturally would be sympathetic. This isn't New York or California. Mans supposed to protect his family. Some whites would admire you but most would want to see you hang. It would be much harder to win an acquittal.”(Grisham 61).

    This textual evidence shows that back some hundred or maybe even fifty years ago that justice wasn't nondiscriminatory, it used to depend on skin color.

    Now comparing justice back then and now I believe that justice is fair, depending where the location is fairness varies but at least today the government goes through a lot more for a person to have a fair trial. In the book, the one who is being charged with the crime, depending on how much power he or she may have could get a bias jury or a jury or judge to their liking. Today, the jury is randomly selected and has to meet requirements such as no connection to the case or the people. The jury is usually a mix of different races and genders from different backgrounds so the jury can’t be bias. The point I’m trying to prove is that comparing the two time period I’m glad to say that the justice system may not be equal and fair but the government at least tries to make the playing field leveled as possible the law will let it be.