The Scottsboro Trial

Paper Summary:

This paper examines whether the verdicts in the trials were inevitable or whether the defense teams made mistakes that were serious enough that, if they had not been made, might have resulted in different verdicts. The writer argues that the guilty verdicts in the trials were inevitable considering the prevalent social, cultural and political attitudes of the American South at the time. There is no doubt that the defense teams made serious mistakes during the trials but the verdict would have been the same even if these mistakes had been avoided.

From the Paper:

"During the 1930s when the Scottsboro Trials took place, white jurors in the Deep South were unwilling to accord a black man, accused of raping a white woman, the presumption of being innocent until proven guilty. At best, the accused were lucky not to be lynched without a trial. So the Scottsboro Boys started off at a great handicap when two white women, Victoria Price and Ruby Bates, (who, later withdrew her accusation) chose to accuse them of rape while riding a freight and gravel carrying train from Tennessee to Alabama."

More papers on The Scottsboro Trial:

• Cause and Effect Essay # 108395 : "The Scottsboro Trial's Effect on Black Freedom"
• Analytical Essay # 3059 : "The Scottsboro Boys Trial"
• Persuasive Essay # 138919 : "The Scottsboro Appeal"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: