answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

The conviction of Tom Robinson was a result of racial prejudice and bias in the justice system at that time. Presenting the same evidence to a jury today would likely result in a different outcome, given the increased awareness and advocacy for equality and justice for all individuals.

User Avatar

AnswerBot

1mo ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: A jury today presented with the same evidence would have found Tom Robinson guilty?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

What is the jury's decision in tom Robinson's case?

Tom Robinson is found guilty by the all-white jury, despite strong evidence proving his innocence. The racial prejudice of the jury members leads to an unjust verdict.


What Chapter was Tom Robinson guilty?

Tom Robinson was found guilty in Chapter 21 of Harper Lee's novel "To Kill a Mockingbird".


How can a court find a person guilty when they have no proof?

It will obvioulsy be the contention of the defendant that no one had any "proof" that they did it, but if they were, nonetheless, found guilty the proseuction MUST have presented enough evidence to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant committed the offense.


What is the jury's verdict in the Tom Robinson case in To Kill a Mockingbird?

In Harper Lee's novel "To Kill a Mockingbird," Tom Robinson is found guilty of the crime he is accused of: raping Mayella Ewell. Despite overwhelming evidence supporting his innocence, the racism prevalent in the community ultimately leads to his unjust conviction.


Why does jem cry after the trial?

Jem cries after the trial because he is devastated by the injustice that Tom Robinson faced despite the overwhelming evidence in his favor. He is also upset by the racism and prejudice displayed by the residents of Maycomb. The trial challenges Jem's beliefs in the fairness and integrity of the justice system.


Why is Jem so keen on getting rid of the jury system TKAMB ch 22-23?

Jem feels disillusioned by the jury system because he realizes that prejudice and racism play a significant role in determining the outcome of trials, regardless of the evidence presented. He becomes frustrated when Tom Robinson is found guilty despite the lack of concrete evidence against him, leading Jem to question the fairness and integrity of the legal system.


Who was the jury members fought to free tom Robinson?

In "To Kill a Mockingbird," the character Atticus Finch defended Tom Robinson in court. The jury members who were convinced by the evidence and testimonies in favor of Tom Robinson's innocence included some unnamed members who were swayed by Atticus's arguments and the truthfulness of the defense. Ultimately, despite their efforts, the jury found Tom Robinson guilty due to the prevailing racial prejudice in the community.


How is prison fair and unfair?

Unfair if you were found guilty due to dodgy evidence.


What kind of evidence is needed to be found guilty of grand theftauto in the state of California?

Enough evidence that it was you that committed the offense.


Is it true or false that Tom Robinson is found not guilty for raping Mayella?

False. Tom Robinson was found guilty (even though he was not) and was sent to prison. Although Atticus proves that Tom could not have committed the crime of which he has been accused, he is nonetheless found guilty due to the overwhelmingly racist social codes of the day. He panics in prison, attempting to escape, and it shot by the guards, who kill him by shooting to kill rather than in the leg to stop him from running further.


How did Henry feel about Catherine howard to begin with?

Apparently Henry was very much in love with Catherine Howard and was saddened when evidence of her adultery was presented to him. He is said to have been very upset and cried. Nevertheless, she was found guilty and eventually beheaded.


Two Italian immigrants found guilty of murder and sentenced to death even though there was a little evidence against them?

Sacco and Vanzetti Were the two Italian immigrants that were found guilty of murder and sentenced to death even though there was little evidence against them.