Emmett Till Case Law of Double Jeopardy Paper A 1-2 paragraph write-up that states your thesis (what your paper will argue). Decide or make a thesis from

Emmett Till Case Law of Double Jeopardy Paper A 1-2 paragraph write-up that states your thesis (what your paper will argue).

Decide or make a thesis from this topics:

The file is attached below with the topics. Chose which one YOU feel comfortable talking about and go for it! I was going to pick the law of double jeopardy but it is up to you. Since you have the find the scholarly sources, you may have the base your sources on your topic or thesis.

Next I need you to:

Select sources from Alabama Virtual Library

Simply google Alabama virtual library and find two sources.

The paper requires a minimum of at least two of these sources.

1-2 paragraph write-up on your two sources (how you plan to use them; why these particular sources will be helpful to the paper, etc). In your write-up, be sure to include the title of the article, the author, and the database it came from.

Definitely make sure you include the minimum of at least two scholarly sources, make sure you include MLA formatted in-text citations for them, and that you have a correctly formatted Works Cited page.

These are two different assignment but all tie in together.

All in all it will only be 4 paragraphs you are writing. Emmett Till Case: Debate Topics
1. The Law of Double Jeopardy
The law of double jeopardy “protected” Roy Bryant and J.W. Milam from being tried
again for the murder of Emmett Till, even after they sold their confession to Look
Magazine for $4,000 (they were also paid for a series of follow-up interviews in 1957
and 1959). However, given the especial brutality of their crime-and the fact that their
trial was a farce to begin with-it would seem that justice should have demanded an
immediate reopening of the investigation. Yet this did not happen. As a debate topic,
you might consider weighing the pros and cons of the double jeopardy law. Is this really
a law that serves the innocent, or one that can be abused to protect the guilty?
2. Profitting From Murder
There are laws that prevent criminals from profiting off their crimes. For example, a
convicted felon or murderer cannot write a book about his crimes and profit from it. If
they give an interview, it has to be without pay. But since Roy Bryant and J.W. Milam
were not convicted, they were able to “sell” their story to a national publication. Even if
they didn’t exactly “profit” from it (since most of the money reportedly went to pay
their legal fees) the morality of their actions can certainly be called into question.
Journalist William Bradford Huie justified paying them, saying it was worth it if it meant
getting the truth out into the media about Jim Crow and vigilante justice. But manyincluding Emmett Till’s family-felt that it served no purpose other than to allow these
murderers a platform and to further smear Emmett’s name with their lies. However, if it
hadn’t been for Huie’s articles, Bryant and Milam might well have kept their dirty secret
to their graves. These articles also helped fuel the sense of national outrage around this
crime, especially as the Civil Rights Movement gained momentum. Huie’s articles helped
to expose the ugly truths about vigilante justice in the South-but for a price. Do you
think that William Bradford Huie’s articles helped in the sense that it at least exposed
the crime, or do you think it simply gave undeserved glory and attention to his killers?
Debate your answers.
3. A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words
When the book The Blood of Emmett Till was published, its author stated in an interview
that Emmett Till’s death was not the first time a 14-year-old black boy had been lynched
in Mississippi. There had been another case in 1942, in which the boy was photographed
with the noose around his neck. But when The New York Times ran the story, they did
not post his pictures, and the story was buried on page 26. This is in stark contrast to
what happened when Mamie Till bravely decided to let the world see what had been
done to her son, and the photographs were seen all over the world. The author said that
timing had a lot to do with it; that the 1950’s was a very different era and the world was
ready to see what was happening. This had been merely thirteen years after the
lynching of the other youth. Why do you think this timing was so crucial, and what
events were transpiring in the mid 50’s to bring about this change?
OR another possible line of debate on this same topic: To what extent did those images
play in igniting the Civil Rights Movement? Do you think the story would have had the
same impact if Mamie had given her son a closed casket funeral?
4. The Divide of North and South…and a Kid Caught Between
Emmett Till’s death cast a national spotlight on just how deeply the divide remained
between “north” and “south.” But even in Emmett’s hometown of Chicago, there was
segregation. Some have argued that Emmett, at 14, would have been street wise and
well aware of societal norms that existed then. These are the ones who insist that
Emmett knew the possible consequences when he whistled at Carolyn Bryant, and that
the act showed both his bravery and defiance. Others, however, insist he was just an
innocent and “naïve kid” who didn’t know any better. Could it be possible that the
“real” Emmett Till was just a kid caught somewhere between these two extremes?
Being a kid from Chicago, was he being openly rebellious of Mississippi conventions (as
some claimed) or just a mischievous kid having a moment of fun with his friends? Based
on your research so far, which do you think is the more likely possibility?
5. Blood Or Healing…Where Does Justice Begin?
Mamie Till said before she died that she had a vision from God, who told her that
Emmett was chosen to carry out a mission. But even if his death did help usher in the
era of Civil Rights, the fact that neither he nor his family received one iota of personal
justice or vindication remains one of the most disturbing and troubling aspects of this
case. Even the reopening of the case in 2007 did not lead to any convictions. Carolyn
Bryant’s confession in 2007 was past the statute of limitations-she could not even be
tried for perjury! Emmett Till’s few surviving family members are concerned because
time is marching on and most of those who were involved or even allegedly involved
have died. If you were in a position of power to finally bring justice to Emmett Louis Till
and his family, how would you do it? What do you think needs to happen-legally-for
justice to take place? What laws need to be changed? Or do you think his death has
already served its rightful place in history, that he “served his mission” from God and
that it is time to heal and move on? Debate your answers.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment