Rhetorical Analysis Of State Of Oregon Vs Kipland

On May 20, 1998, Kipland Kinkel went on a shooting rampage at Thurstone High School. After the shooting spree Kipland was arrested and convicted of four counts of murder and twenty-six attempted counts of murder, with a total sentence time of 111 years and eight months. Four years into the 111-year sentence, the attorneys of Kipland Kinkel appealed the initial sentencing. In the “State of Oregon v. Kipland Philip Kinkel,” Judge Haselton offers information on the original trial, the grounds of the appeal and the state’s decision to uphold the sentence. Judge Haselton utilizes the rhetorical tools of ethos, pathos and logos to support the court’s decision to deny the appeal. In the “State of Oregon v. Kipland Philip Kinkel,” the defendant is appealing his sentence of 111 years and eight months. The defendant was charged and pled guilty to four counts of murder and twenty-six attempted counts of murder, in 1998. During the sentence hearing, the defendant claimed that his actions were caused by a mental disease, and that this …show more content…
Ethos is the rhetorical appeal that refers to the author of the document and establishes their credentials and authority. A specific example that illustrates the effective use of ethos occurs after the defense argued that a life sentence is unconstitutional under Article I, section 15 of the Oregon constitution. Haselton responds to this claim using ethos stating that “Article I, section 15, of the Oregon Constitution provides a basis for challenging the constitutionality of “[l]aws for the punishment of crime,” not for challenging the length of a particular individual’s sentences” (para. 19). By referencing Article I, section 15 of the Oregon constitution, Haselton demonstrates his credibility and knowledge of the legal system. By doing so, Haselton showcases the audience his authority to deny the defenses’