By Adam Liptak in teh Dec. 4th New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/04/us/04felony.html?th&emc=th
Wow! this article is crazy. A really messed up story.
The lead was good. It was really interesting but didn't really address that 5 w's. The following i thought was really well written. After each paragraph i read i had a question in my mind, and it was immediately answered in the next paragraph. The author made the piece very interesting and I thought that it was really good that he included how the laws in other countries have changed to prevent things like this from happening.
i though that i was interesting that the prosecutors main arguement was "No car, no crime". Yes crime if no car. I think they probably had the intent to steal wheter they had his car or not. And it isn't as if they ran the woman over to kill her using his car. It just took them to the place where they chose to commit their crime.
This article was upsetting, but again very interesting and well written.
About Me
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
wow, this was a crazy and informative article! i really agreed with what you said about how the questions you had were answered in the next paragraph, and i also liked how it covered different laws and the past laws that influenced them. good job analyzing the article and thanks for posting it, i thought it was really interesting.
Post a Comment