Eyewitness the movie and the issue of identification Essay

Eyewitness the movie and the issue of identification - Essay Example Eyewitness the Movie and the Issue of Identification Introduction For many years, a debate on the issue of eyewitness identification and testimony has been raging with thin the justice system.One camp pushes the concept that that eyewitness identification is not reliable and is, in fact, detrimental to the pursuit of genuine justice. This side of the argument insists that eyewitness accounts have many times resulted into the resolution of cases based on testimonies, which could be subjective and inaccurate, instead of on the merits of physical evidences, which could be more concrete and objective. The opposing camp, on the other hand, insists that eyewitness accounts are necessary to hasten the resolution of criminal cases in court. It stresses the point that without the testimony of a person who saw the crime committed, positive identification of the suspects cannot be achieved. Even as the debate on the merits and demerits of the two sides continue though, there have been films and television shows that tackle the issue directly and indirectly. The movie Eyewitness may not have presented a courtroom drama that dealt with the pros and cons eyewitness testimony but it did present the filmmaker’s own perspective on the issue. It did so by depicting a character that wishes to present himself as a witness to a crime not because he is interested in seeing the resolution of a murder case but because of his personal objective of winning the affection of a person. Weakness of Eyewitness Testimony Eyewitness is a movie that was released in 1981. The film was directed by Peter Yates and written by Steve Tesich. It stars William Hurt as Daryll Deever, the janitor who discovered the body of a murder victim in the building he is working in. Sigourney Weaver plays the role of a zealous television reporter, Tony Sokolow, who wants to get a scoop of the murder case. Deever sees the opportunity of becoming close to Sokolow when he presented himself as someone who discov ered the body. While this may be true though, Deever goes to the extent of insinuating that he saw more than just the dead body but also the actual crime while it was committed. This leads Tony to be interested in Deever’s account, hoping to be the first to broadcast the story to the public. Tony actually is already in a relationship with someone else, Joseph played by Christopher Plummer. However, just to have a story, she manages to flirt a little with Deever. Joseph, on the other hand, is also very interested about what Deever knows which is why he is not quite concerned about the relationship between Tony and Daryll. The attempt by Deever to maintain Tony’s interest in him later turned into the source of conflict in the film. The murderers begins to consider the possibility that Daryll may have indeed witness the commission of the crime and that Tony already knows about it. For fear of being caught by the police, who are already doing investigations on the matter, they run after both Tony and Daryll with the aim of silencing them before their identities are divulged to the public. The police for their part have also begun believing that Daryll may have indeed witnessed the crime and that he could identify the perpetrators. However, the issue that is at stake here really is regarding the credibility of the eyewitness. Deever is obviously motivated by his desire to become personally close to Tony. On the other hand, Tony, who can amplify Deever’s claim because she is a journalist, is only interested in getting a scoop. The police, whose objective is to see that the crime is solved as soon as possible, also have the tendency to believe in whatever story Deever may come up with because of convenience. Here lies the central issue of eyewitness identification. Without determining the possible motivation of the witness, a case could be brought to court with suspects pointed out through the most biased and unscientific means. Through the jury system employed by the American judiciary, the honesty of the witness has a very profound impact on the

Why i want to be a LPN Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Why i want to be a LPN - Essay Example I chose your school of nursing because it is an award-winning school and I believe that it would assist me in the development of my comprehension of the basic principles of nursing. I understand that the program that the school presents is planned to meet the swiftly growing requirement for competent nurses in our country. The school’s high-tech facilities, faculty as well as other professional resources will also be invaluable during my study. I have always had a particular interest in studying science and I have excelled in my grades. Moreover, I am an open minded, hard working, dynamic, and sociable individual who possesses great interpersonal and networking skills. I am also excellent in team playing and I have other traits such as attention to details, readiness to learn, and the ability to work with minimal supervision. These would be invaluable as I pursue my dream. Moreover, I believe that pursuing the profession of a Licensed Practical Nurse would grant me the opportunity of improving these skills, which would make me even better. Pursuing this profession will also endow me with exceptional support and training, over and above giving me the opportunity to interact with the infamous nursing professionals in your institution. Once I become a Licensed Practical Nurse, I aim to take part actively in the promotion as well as provision of health care services to the best of my capability. I am genuinely concerned in people’s health, and I would love to work in hospitals, private homes settings, extended care facilities, nursing homes among other settings where there is need to serve humanity by improving their life

The Case Of Speluncean Explorers Essay Example for Free

The Case Of Speluncean Explorers Essay FACTS A group of 5 including the 4 defendants and Roger Whetmore had entered into a limestone cavern. A landslide occurred and the boulders blocked the only entrance of the cave. When they discovered the problem, the 5 settled themselves on the obstructed entry until a rescue part could rescue them. Employers had left indicators at the headquarters of the society about where the cavern was. On the failure of their return, a rescue party was dispatched. The rescue task was really difficult. More men and machinery had to be conveyed to the remote area. A group of engineers, workmen, geologists and other experts were appointed. The work of removing the obstructions was frustrated by fresh landslides. Ten workmen were killed while clearing the entrance. All the treasury of the Speculean community was exhausted. Eight hundred thousand frevlars raised by legislative grants were all exhausted before the men were rescued. Success was finally achieved on the 32nd day of the rescue mission. It was known that the workers had carried very little provisions with them and that there were no animal or food matter in the cavern. On the 20th day of the rescue, it was discovered that the workers had carried with them a radio transmitter through which communication could be established. The workers asked the physicians and the experts how long it would take for them to be rescued, the physicians told them that it would take atleast 10 days and there was a little possibility for them to survive. Then they asked the physicians whether they could survive if they consumed one their coworkers. The physicians chairman replied reluctantly in affirmative. Roger Whetmore asked the physicians if they could do that by casting lots. There was no answer from their side. Then he asked if any party or a judge was willing to answer this question, there was no answer. He then asked if a priest could answer the question, unfortunately, even they could not. Thereafter, no more messages were received as the battery of the radio receiver had been exhausted. On the 23rd day of the rescue, Whetmore was killed and was eaten by his companions. Then it was known from the defendants that Whetmore had proposed this idea about whod be eaten by the throw of a dice. When it was Whetmores turn, the dice was thrown by a defendant and it turned out to be against Whetmore. He then was killed and eaten by his companions. VERDICT OF THE JUDGES CHIEF JUSTICE TRUEPENNY: He believed that the four defendants should be sentenced to death as he stated Whoever shall wilfully take the life of another shall be punished by death. He mentions that the above statute is not open to more than one interpretation ie it is unambiguous. He also suggested the idea of executive clemency adding that granting mercy would be in the hands of the executive. JUSTICE FOSTER He disagreed with the verdict of the Chief Justice. He thought that the defendants were innocent. He believed that the statute put forward by CJ Truepenny was not applicable  in this case as the law of nature was applied (defendants were in a state of nature at the time of the killing). He also said that if 10 workmens lives were sacrificed to save 5, why not kill 1 to save 4 lives. JUSTICE TATTING He felt sorry for the defendants but at the same time, also had a feeling of disgust at the act they committed. He strongly disagreed with Justice Fosters state of nature. He also thinks that self defence cant be applied to the case as it would raise difficulties. Ultimately, he is not able to decide the case. JUSTICE KEEN He took on the case from a morality point of view. He was in favour of the defendants not being given a death sentence. He criticized the other judges for failing to differentiate between the moral and legal aspects of the case. He also criticizes the courts self defence excuse. JUSTICE HANDY He uses a common-sense approach instead of using legal principles to solve the case. He had a philosophical point of view and was in favour of publics opinion on the case. MY VERDICT ON THE CASE This case has two sides ie the legal side and the moral side. If this case is seen from the legal side, then a death sentence is justified for the four defendants as the statute itself states that whoever shall wilfully take the life of another shall be punished by death. But I personally think that this case is special and it should be seen from the moral point of view. I dont believe that the defendants should be given a death sentence. I strongly disagree with CJ Truepennys verdict, with all due respect. The four defendants were in extremely unfavourable conditions and they had no choice but to kill one the companions and consume them, so that they could survive. The facts suggest that when Roger Whetmore asked the chairman of the physicians if they consume any one of the four companions, they would survive or not, the chairman also replied in affirmative even though he was reluctant. And the decision to kill Roger Whetmore was also justified as per the throw of dice. I agree with Justice Fosters views as well. First of all, the law of nature should be applied to this case as the defendants were in a state of nature at the time of killing. And as per the facts suggest, 10 workmen were killed to save the life of 5 people, then why not kill 1 person and save the life of 4 others? As far as granting executive clemency is concerned, I think that it should completely be in the hands of the executive, but I would be in favour of granting them with it.

Critiques of TWAIL Perspective and Investment Law

Critiques of TWAIL Perspective and Investment Law CONSTRUCTIVE APPROACH TOWARDS INVESTMENT LAW CHALLENGING VIEWS OF THE THIRD WORLD APPROACHES The conventional view in western states among international legal scholars is that no comprehensible or distinctive Third World Approach is apparent in international law. While it remains undeniable that certain reoccurring issues trigger the same response from Third World states[1], per scholars the typical view expressed is that disparate strands do not weave together a sort of pattern.[2] Although they are grouped together beneath Third World rubric, it is a constitution of no more than ad hoc responses to discrete issues. The recognition of the Third World approach to any extent can only be categorised as reactive in nature. This is supported by Wolfgang Friedmann who argues that any difference in the approach taken by underdeveloped countries could be explained in terms of their lack of economic and political clout. Likewise, a couple years later the same perspective is argued that instead of challenging international laws fundamental assumptions, the third world scholars are st ill concerned with the responsiveness of international law focusing in regards to their interest.[3] Western scholars that are even sympathetic towards Third World approaches express similar views. For instance, Richard Falk has claimed that even explicit anti-Western works by third world scholars have been in reliance on western approaches in a moderately non-critical manner. Thus, Falk argues that the emergence of distinctive modes of thought and analysis failed to accompany the process of decolonization, or even to follow upon it.[4] Per Falk third world scholars are inclined to avoid any ideological imprint upon their work, as they want it to work scientific in a Western sense.[5] An analogy is created between third world scholars characteristics and Soviet scholars. Soviet scholars were pragmatically oriented towards enabling Soviet bloc participation in the prevailing debates in Western international law circles.[6] TWAIL scholar B.S Chimni supports Falk critique and argues that TWAIL has been stagnant as a critique instead of proposing practical alternatives to the issue. He makes this criticism clear in a passage from his work: While international lawyers from the Third World have challenged, often with success, Western perceptions of the history and content of international law and pointed to the inequitable nature of the body of rules bequeathed from the past, they have failed to propose and articulate an alternative approach which is inclusive and internally consistent. In fact, the matter has not received sufficient consideration. It is, therefore, not unusual to see a Third World scholar speaking of rejecting rules which are prejudicial to the interests of developing countries embracing a theory of international law and world order which seeks to justify and protect the status quo and has little to say about the developing world. This eventually leads him to assume positions which strengthen that which he had set out to fight.[7] A specific example where this perspective is mainly critiqued is from the failures of the NIEO. It is criticised for lacking breadth and Robert Rothstein claimed that short-sighted stance had been taken hence the reason the regime failed. Rothstein argued that instead of the regime being focused on how to create a clear strategy that will have both western and third world states mutual interests and consensual knowledge and technically sound proposals, the focus was on a strategy of confrontation and a demand for the acceptance pf biased and controversial principles[8] This shows that the TWAIL view is limited and has no practical alternatives to revolutionise the injustice upon third world states. Rather their methods are to flip the legal system and turn it into a bias third world system, which will not therefore lead to any justice and harmony within international law. This supports both Falk and Chimni claim of TWAIL lacking pragmatism and having a positive impact. TWAIL LIMITATION AND MORE CONSTRUCTIVE APPROACH TO INVESTMENT REGIME IN INTERNATIONAL LAW Even though the TWAIL critiques has been significant, nonetheless it has been flagged up to have several blind spots.[9] One of the fundamental blind spots flagged is the critique to suggest practical ways to remedy the deficiencies within international law (especially international economic governance). Although jurists do highlight theoretical arguments, it fails to suggest constructive solutions in improving the injustice upon third world states in the international system. Therefore, it is necessary to provide a constructive solution that will also take the third world states interests into account. The desires of the TWAIL perspective should go beyond being a mere instrument of system criticism.[10] It should have the ambition to form a constructive engagement; therefore, it should develop and lay out ideas that could be expressed in practical terms to improve the governance of international investment and economic law.   A key issue developing countries are faced with in international trade has been competitiveness of liberalization.[11] Refers to trade of western countries on preferential terms (PTs) with only chosen developing countries, which is incongruent with GATTs principle of only trading with your most favoured nation. Competitive liberalization is argued to have led to economic success to states such as South Korea (KORUS) and Mexico (NAFTA)[12] who benefited from regional trade agreements (RTA). But this was at the expense of neighbouring states who stayed relatively underdeveloped.[13]Evidentially competitive liberalization has a detrimental impact on other developing states ability to find markets that would give them a competitive and comparative advantage. In this sense TWAIL could be more effective and remedy this issue by spearheading the creation of geographically wider RTAs encompassing regional economic blocs in different parts of the developing world.[14] An example of the possible RTA could be between Economic Community of West African States and Mercado Comà ºn del Sur which would be valuable to both regional blocs. Thus, West African states will be able to supply the cotton, which is in demand in South America, due to the growth of the textile industry, while South Americans vice versa would have a market for electronic goods which is becoming essential in West Africa. This would be an approach that could be implemented to enhance the participation of developing states in international trade. TWAILs concern in the international investment regime is primarily related to the inequality of negotiations within arbitration treaty and International Institutional Agreements. Per TWAIL a practical approach could be implemented on IIAs, for instance with regards to BITs, developing states can create their own models. An example of this is apparent from the SADC (Southern African Development Community) BIT model. SADC BIT model consist of the same characteristics of a traditional BIT, just with the addition of striving more towards an equitable, fair and just participation within the foreign investment regime for third world states. The model is a representation of distinct efforts to enhance a sustainable development dimension of future BITs.[15] Such engagement with the foreign investment regime would create the welcoming environment that developing countries need to enhance participation in the foreign investment regime. Moreover, another unproductive approach from TWAIL within international investment law is the resistance towards investment treaty arbitration. Again, here there is a failure to suggest a constructive approach to rectify this problem that the third world are subject to. As apparent in the case of OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION v REPUBLIC OF ECUADOR, the withdrawal of Ecuador due to its disregard to the unjust manners of the ICSID did not prevent the ICSID from awarding the largest damages to the investors which was a rough total sum of $1.7 billion plus 6% interest.[16] Consequently a more pragmatic approach for developing states is to implement their own arbitration centres equivalent to the AALCCs regional arbitration centres establishment within the African- Asian region.[17] But this should be done wi th a sustained participation within the current system. The establishments of these centres within the Afro-Asian region has been advantageous as it alleviates concerns of developing states in regards to participating in international arbitration. Besides that, it will promote better engagement in the foreign investment regime and facilitate more participation of developing states in the current system. CONCLUSION This chapter shows that there are flaws within the TWAIL theory and it is a critique perspective rather than a constructive one. Perhaps there are aspects of the investment regime that bring injustice within international law but constructive alternatives methods must be suggested to improve the system. This is where the TWAIL theory is limited and other perspectives such as first world scholars should be analysed before a conclusion can be made regarding the international law being unjust. CONCLUSION This thesis has discussed the accuracy of the TWAIL theory that investment regime in international law is used as another tool to support the domination of the Western world. This commenced by dating the emergence of TWAIL back to decolonisation era and ever since the aim of the theory has been to redirect international laws focus to the plight of developing countries.[18] TWAIL focuses on the significant paradigm shift from the historical relevance of the NEC and NIEO approaches to the regime bias. The regime bias theory has been emblematic of the entire system of international law and is even visible in International Institutions such as Arbitration. The regime bias critique illustrates developing countries sceptical attitudes towards the international economic governance which includes both international trade and foreign investment.   This is because, as Shalakany argues s the regime bias in international law empowers the investors, who come off as winners within the syste m at the expense of ignoring the Third Worlds interest. TWAIL argues that the international institutions increases the ideological gap to ensure that there is unequal participation in the system. Corporations being in control of resources in host states already provides constraints on a step towards a just investment regime. This is because it maintains colonial attitude which makes the Third World states passive rather than active participant in the investment regime. Likewise, the International Functioning Institutions have also helped to maintain the dominance of Western States in International Investment by promoting globalization, and making it a mandatory requirement to for Third World States to adopt privatization programmes to create more favourable investment climates for the investors.[19] Nonetheless a fundamental blind spot[20] of TWAIL critiques is that it fails to offer avenues for a constructive engagement of developing countries in the investment regime in international law. TWAILs shortcomings have highlighted the need for a pragmatic solution instead of just being a mere critique[21] tool of the international law regime. It has been criticised for being very repetitive and staying stagnant on the idea of l law responding to Third World interests instead of challenging the fundamental issues in international law. A more pragmatic approach for developing countries in the investment regime is seeking to alleviate their concerns and enhance their participation in the system. This would pave the way for a more constructive engagement of developing countries in the investment regime of international law and will also prevent the domination of the Western States, as the lack of participation is part of what has enabled the First World to be so powerful. I can conclude from this thesis that the investment regime in international law is subtle in the way it suppresses the developing countries and maintains the interests of the developed countries. Therefore, it makes it challenging to argue that the whole regime is unjust. However, although the TWAIL approach is rhetoric[22] in the nature of its arguments, I agree with the view that part of the key issues that supports the domination of Western States is the amount control they have in the key international institutions; for example, US being the largest shareholder in the World Bank. To constructively solve this issue, it could be argued that the starting point should be reconstructing the rules and process making of these institutions, in order for there to be a fair just and balanced participation between the less developed and developed states. There should then consist of a body who makes checks and balances to ensure that no states acts ultra vires. This would lead to an interna tional law that would reject bias and be based on mutual interests. [1] Karin Mickelson Rhetoric and Rage: Third World Voices in International Legal Discourse16 Wis. Intl L.J. 353 1997-1998 p. 353 [2] Karin Mickelson Rhetoric and Rage: Third World Voices in International Legal Discourse 16 Wis. Intl L.J. 353 1997-1998. p. 353 [3] Patricia Buirette-Maurau, La Participation Du Tiers-Monde , A LElaboration Du Droit International (1983)199-202 [4] Richard Falk, Preface to B.S. Chimni, International Law and World Order: A Critique of Contemporary Approaches 9, (1993). p.9 [5]Richard Falk, Preface to B.S. Chimni, International Law and World Order: A Critique of Contemporary Approaches 9, (1993) p.9 [6] Richard Falk, Preface to B.S. Chimni, International Law and World Order: A Critique of Contemporary Approaches 9, (1993) p.9 [7] Richard Falk, Preface to B.S. Chimni, International Law and World Order: A Critique of Contemporary Approaches 9, (1993) p19 [8] Robert L. Rothstein, Limits and Possibilities of Weak Theory: Interpreting North-South, 44 J. OF INTL AFFAIRS 159, (1990). p.174 [9] John D. Haskell, TRAIL-ing TWAIL: Arguments and Blind Spots in Third WorldApproaches to International Law (Mississippi College School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 7/2014, 2014) pg.18. [10] Antonius R Hippolyte Correcting TWAILS Blind Spots: A Plea for a Pragmatic Approach to International Economic Governance.p.15 [11] C. Fred Bergsten Competitive Liberalization and Global Free Trade: A Vision for the Early 21st Century (Peterson Institute: Institute for International Economics. Working Paper 15/1996, 1996) [12] KORUS trade was an agreement between South Korea and US. NAFTA was a trade agreement between Mexico and North America. [13] Antonius R Hippolyte Correcting TWAILS Blind Spots: A Plea for a Pragmatic Approach to International Economic Governance.p.16 [14] Antonius R Hippolyte Correcting TWAILS Blind Spots: A Plea for a Pragmatic Approach to International Economic Governance.p.16 [15] Antonius R Hippolyte Correcting TWAILS Blind Spots: A Plea for a Pragmatic Approach to International Economic Governance.p.16 [16] 2012 ICSID Case No.ARB/06/11 at paras 824-25. [17] R Rajesh Babu, International Commercial Arbitration and the Developing Countries (2006) 4 AALCO Quarterly Bulletin 386, 398. [18] Antonius R Hippolyte Correcting TWAILS Blind Spots: A Plea for a Pragmatic Approach to International Economic Governance.p.18 [19] Antony Anghie, Time Present and Time Past: Globalization, International Financial Institutions and the Third World. p.256 [20]Antonius R Hippolyte Correcting TWAILS Blind Spots: A Plea for a Pragmatic Approach to International Economic Governance.p.18 [21] Antonius R Hippolyte Correcting TWAILS Blind Spots: A Plea for a Pragmatic Approach to International Economic Governance.p.18 [22] Karin Mickelson, Rhetoric and Rage: Third World Voices in International Legal Discourse (1998) 16 Wis. Intl L.J.

On The Waterfront, Terry Malloy :: Movie, Film Analysis

Terry Malloy as a â€Å"Hero†   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  When Terry Malloy was first introduced, he did not make any indications that he would strive for the respect that he gained throughout the story. His tough-guy behavior and compassionate attitude has made him what he is: a hero. He never revealed what he was truly made of or what he was capable of. He always had low self-esteem about himself—repeatedly calling himself a â€Å"bum.† Despite his stubbornness to change and his ignorance to others, Malloy proves himself by doing what he knows is right to be a true hero.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Throughout the whole film, Malloy displayed himself as a bum. He rarely works, and he is a has-been boxer. Others occasionally criticize him about his boxing career; explaining to him that he was no good. Because a lot of the criticism got to Terry’s head, he was unable to associate with others. This proves so with the relationship he has with Edie Doyle. He is barely able to hold the relationship with Edie, even though she is the one whom Terry loves so much. Up to this point, Malloy does not display himself as a hero, or even close to being one.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  When Malloy put himself to the test, he rarely came out successful. This all changed when he saw the death of his brother, Charlie the Gent. Malloy decided to stand up for what he knew was right and went to speak with Johnny Friendly face to face. As the scene unfolded, the depiction of Malloy being a hero was relevant. He stood up for his brother, and his girlfriend. He knew what the outcome would be if he confronted the â€Å"hoods,† yet he did what he had to do for the people on the dock, and above all, for the people he cared about the most; and for this, he gained the respect and loyalty that he deserved.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  As the film progressed, Malloy’s character seemed to have changed. He became more sensitive towards Edie, and he stuck with his wits and testified against his own former friends, â€Å"the hoods.† But with every good thing, there must be something bad that comes out of it. When Malloy lost the respect of his co-workers and friends by testifying against the hoods, he became a target for blame that the people of the town needed to show that they were still behind the hoods. Yet when Malloy went on the dock and professed what he truly thought of Friendly and the others, the people of the town realized that what Terry was saying is correct, and they eventually regained there respect for Terry.

Essay --

Pros and Cons on Medical Marijuana Medical marijuana is referred to parts of herb cannabis that is used as a form of medicine or herbal therapy. These parts contain the compounds that produce the mild altering effect that recreational users seek when smoking or ingesting the plant. Researches have shown that it is able to provide chronic pain relief. Marijuana has been used as a folk or traditional remedy for a variety of health conditions for many of years. Medical marijuana is a management tool that can reduce patient’s pain and improve quality of life, without the same serious side effects associated with use of pharmaceutical pain relievers. Proponents agree that medical marijuana can be a safe and effective treatment for the symptoms of cancer, Aids, MS, glaucoma, and other conditions. Marijuana legalization boosted the economy such as reducing marijuana prices, saving huge prison cost, and many more. Some scientist feel that more research have shown that cannabinoids is useful in treating multiple sclerosis. Marijuana may protect nerves from the kind of damage that occurs during the disease. People believe that marijuana is less toxic than many drugs that physicians prescribe every day. The primary reasons people support marijuana is because they believe marijuana is no more harmful to a person’s health than alcohol or tobacco, legalizing marijuana in more states would end certain criminal behavior, and marijuana is one of Americas top selling agricultural products. Also, marijuana can be a rich new source of tax revenues nationwide which can help lift the U.S economy out of a recession and money would be saved annually in government spending on enforcement, including for the FBI. Supporters believe ... ...to qualify for medical marijuana prescriptions, while other states accept registry ID cards from any state. In 2012, more than 740, 000 people were arrested in the United States for marijuana related offenses. Many physicians believe that marijuana is the best available treatment for some of their patients because marijuana produces no unacceptable risks to the users or the community. Medical marijuana is a valid choice for those in real need but although marijuana may serve a beneficial function for people. Medical Marijuana is a valid choice for those in real need but although marijuana may serve a beneficial function for people with certain health conditions, marijuana is not a beneficial drug for anyone who does not explicitly require it for symptoms relief. Medical marijuana can help some people but that does that make marijuana a good idea for all people.

Comparing Pride and Prejudice to Macbeth

In the first few chapters of ‘Pride and Prejudice’, Jane Austen portrays Fitzwilliam Darcy as: â€Å"so high and conceited†, â€Å"a most disagreeable man† and possessed of â€Å"shocking madness†. This is conveyed to the audience through Elizabeth Bennet’s eavesdropping and the Bennet family’s first impression of Darcy. At the start of ‘Macbeth’ however, the central character, Macbeth, is portrayed by William Shakespeare as a hero. In Scotland he is loved, trusted and admired: â€Å"Oh valiant cousin, worthy gentleman†, â€Å"brave Macbeth†.Nevertheless by the end of both works, the audience’s own opinion of each character has changed to the complete opposite. Their opinion has been altered by the authors who try to confute the audience’s initial understanding of both characters. Many characters throughout ‘Pride and Prejudice’ change in one way or another. They especially change ot her people’s impressions of them. A good example of this is Mr Wickham. When Wickham is first introduced into the novel, he is portrayed as a good, kind man who was unfortunate enough to have lived with Darcy: â€Å"Wickham was the happy man towards whom almost every female eye was turned†¦ As the novel progresses Elizabeth begins to find out about his true characteristics. The way in which Jane Austen changes our opinion of Wickham is initially through the letter that Darcy sends to Elizabeth after she has declined his first offer of marriage. The letter she receives explains why Darcy dislikes Wickham. It tells her of the ungentleman like things that Wickham has done in the past. It explains how he became a â€Å"wild one† as one of Darcy’s housemaids told Elizabeth when she made a visit to Pemberley.On the other hand in ‘Macbeth’, the character who undergoes the most change throughout the play is in fact Macbeth himself. At first, he was a very honourable and noble man, both on and off the battlefields of Scotland. This is shown we he is appointed to becoming Thane of Cawdor: â€Å"He bade me, from him, call thee Thane of Cawdor†. Macbeth however, was a very ambitious man as well, and this was part of the reason for his change of character and downfall: â€Å"I have no spur†¦but only vaulting ambition which o’erleaps itself†.It was Shakespeare’s portrayal of Macbeth’s ambition that allowed him to have the ability to change the audience’s opinion of Macbeth completely. Pushed by the idea that he could become king, his growing ambition and misplace confidence in the prophecies and Lady Macbeth, Macbeth begins to become an evil, murderous tyrant lacking any sense of mind. Another way in which Jane Austen changes ideas and characters in ‘Pride and Prejudice’ is through the actions and words of Mr Bennet. Mr Bennet undergoes one of the most significant changes thr oughout the course of the novel.When he is first introduced he is one of the primary characters offering comic relief and as the beginning of the story progresses, we see that his primary characteristics revolve around poking fun at his wife; â€Å"I have the utmost respect for your nerves. They've been my constant companion these twenty years. † He also stays aloof from his daughters, and does not care about serious matters of love. As the novel progresses, most especially after Lydia's elopement and arranged marriage, we see Mr. Bennet's character begin to change.The weight of his careless attitude finally sits heavy enough on his shoulders that he can no longer ignore it. While he still pokes fun at his wife, he understands that his daughters need a firm father if they are to curb their wild natures. With Lydia, it was too late, but he wasted no time in turning on Kitty and immediately laying down the law of his house: â€Å" This shows the audience that he realises that he hasn’t brought up his daughters how he wanted to and her wants to change that with kitty.