Michael Morton Court Case

Throughout the years people have claimed and argued their position towards a big question. Although the simple truth thesis states that big questions admit simple, obvious, and undisputable answers this is not true. Big questions never admit straightforward and unquestionable answers. A big question can be anything from What is Life? to Is capital punishment wrong? yet, I will focus on Does the adversarial process harm plaintiffs and Defendants?. I will argue that the legal system does harm plaintiffs and defendants since, it has failed to protect and enforce the rights of individuals. Innocent people are going to prison or in other cases guilty individuals are not going to jail. The legal system also harms individuals, as the process itself tends to favor those with the most resources. The case of Michael Morton, reported by Michigan Law School, proves how the legal system can indeed cause harm to an individual. Michael Morton was convicted for killing his wife therefore, he was sentenced to life in prison (Michigan Law 1). Murder is wrong and individuals who commit this act deserve to go to jail, however, Michael Morton didn’t actually killed his wife. He was sentenced to life in prison for an act that he didn’t commit. Michael Morton spent almost 25 years fighting the legal system to …show more content…
The legal process failed to protect and enforce the rights of Michael Morton, Mr. Bright and many other individuals. The simple fact that the attorney 's goal is not to seek the truth but to defend their clients within the boundaries of the adversarial system can cause a lot of harm as the truth doesn’t always come out and some people get wrongfully convicted. To avoid innocent people from going to prison judges and juries should only find the defendants guilty or convict them only after they believe for good reasons that the defendant committed the