A Time To Kill

A Time to Kill

A Time to kill is a 1996 movie that deals with a quite uncomfortable story. A black man by the name Carl Lee Hailey fights to gain justice for both his family and himself, in the town of Clanton, Mississippi. Carl Lee Hailey fight’s for justice began after his 10-year-old daughter Tonya was brutally raped by two non-colored boys, as she was making her way back home from the grocery store. Carl became really anger at the fact that regardless of what had happen, there could be a chance of them getting off, like in a similar case with 4 non-colored boys who also raped a black girl and got off last year in Delta. So without any hesitation Carl was more determined then ever to have these boys get what was coming to them and he accomplishes this by taking the law into the hands of his own. In addition Carl Lee Hailey then guns down the two non-colored boy’s cold blooded, inside the courthouse on the day of their arraignment. Soon after Jake Brigance, a non-colored defence lawyer is faced with this case to defend Carl Lee Hailey. Now Jake and his assistant Ellen Roark, a stellar law student from Ole Miss, both work to help Carl get off his murder trial innocently.

Firstly, “To be criminally responsible, an accused must not only have been able to understand the distinction between right and wrong at the time of the offence, but must also have been capable of making a reasoned choice between acting in a right or wrong way.” Given this definition, although I may not want to actually admit it, but Carl Lee Hailey should be convicted. The reason for this is because Carl was able to understand the distinction between right and wrong, and at the time he was capable of making a reasoned choice between acting in a right or wrong way. Sadly, Carl made the option of acting in a wrong way, in order to obtain justice. This is a known fact because Carl actually admitted this to the police officer, who also got hurt at the time. Carl was friends with the police officer who at the time was escorting the two young boys, through the court house when he was also shot unintentionally by Carl. “Looney? Dwayne? I made Ozzie bring me. Shit, Dwayne. We knowed each other since childhood. It's my fault. No matter what gets said in court. I knew what I was doing, and I sure didn't intend to hurt you, but just them two boys. I know it don't mean much now, but I'm sorry”, said Carl. In conclusion, if the decision was based on me, I would have him acquitted, but since it is based on the Supreme Court of Canada’s definition well then…Yes he should be convicted.

Secondly, I do believe that the charging of Carl Lee satisfied purposes of the criminal law that we have discussed such as “bodily arm” and “firearm”. Firstly “Bodily harm” means any hurt or injury to a person that interferes with the health or comfort of the person and that is more than merely transient or trifling in nature is a criminal act. In addition, “firearm” means a barrelled weapon from which any shot, bullet or other projectile

...