Tim Masters

The article “We should be ashamed”, contained a number of pathos. Gail Schoettler wrote about the case of Tim Masters, a man who was convicted of a crime in which he did not commit at the age of 16. Masters spent over 10 years in prison, serving time for a crime in which he had nothing to do with. Upon the discovery of new DNA evidence, Tim Masters was found not guilty and was released from prison. Gail Schoettler brings up a good point. If all this time Tim Masters was innocent but was sentenced to being guilty, how many other people over the past years have been convicted for crimes that they did not commit? How many innocent people have received the death penalty for nothing? If Tim Masters was an adult at the time rather than being 15 years of age, he could have received the death penalty, and now that DNA evidence has proven him not guilty, it would have been a shame to see an innocent man gone. Although he wasted 10 years of his life, a time when he could have been establishing a career and a family, Gail suggests that we should take this incident and make it a learning experience. “No one should be imprisoned or executed because of false testimony, incompetent investigators, withheld evidence or inept attorneys.”

This is a matter of fact. I personally am glad that Masters has been released from prison and was not executed. It would be devastating to know that an innocent soul had been taken. As I sit and think about the number of death penalties that are issued every year, especially in Texas, and think about the many people who are shouting “I didn’t do it”, I become sad. Questions such as “was that person really innocent” and “are they sure they have the right person” all enter my mind. It should not be like this. When someone is issued the death penalty, authorities and the justice system should be 100 percent positive as to having the right person. Our justice system should do a better job with evidence, making sure nothing is withheld and the person convicted is really guilty. I know that mistakes happen and a lot of time evidence may point to the innocent person, but with increasing technology and DNA testing, there is no excuse. Gail was taking a bit of a sentimental appeal, but the constructive pathos was definitely obvious. She stated a lot of emotions, which were factual and invited the reader to take a stance and understand where she was coming from. I was able to connect with Gail and I feel that she did a fabulous job on illustrating how pathos are great tools for constructing arguments.