Write a five-page paper about the Curtis Flowers case, as reported on by Madeleine Baran in Season 2 of the In the Dark podcast. Curtis Flowers was tried six times for a crime he almost certainly did not commit. His most recent conviction was overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2019, on the grounds that the prosecutor engaged in racial bias during jury selection. In addition to racial bias, many other problems permeate this case, including several of the issues we cover in class (e.g., witness memory; confirmation bias; and coercive tactics). In addition to the podcast, I want you to listen to the oral arguments in the Supreme Court case and read a summary of the Court’s opinion. For your paper, I want you to discuss your thoughts and reactions to the Flower’s case in light of the research on the human psychological factors that contribute to wrongful conviction that you have learned about in class. Where to find the stuff you need: You can find season 2 of the In the Dark podcast here (or anywhere you get your podcasts; ., Apple; Spotify etc.): There are 11 episodes in the initial reporting of the case. These are required for the paper. The podcast followed as the case moved through the system, was overturned by the Court, and Mississippi decided next steps. After episodes 1-11, you will find several “updates” and a new set of follow-up episodes (12-20). The updates and episodes 12-20 are not required, though I encourage you to listen to them. I am fairly sure that after listening to episodes 1-11, you will want to listen to what happened next. You can find the Supreme Court’s oral arguments in the case here. There will be a link on the left hand side of where you can listen to the arguments. This is required. You can read the Supreme Court’s syllabus (summary) of the majority decision here. This is required. Instructions and tips regarding format and content: This is a reaction paper, so you actually have a lot of freedom in terms of what you choose to focus on. A reaction paper is exactly what it sounds like: it is your reaction (your response, feelings, opinion) following exposure to the story. You all won’t come away with the exact same thoughts — so you have freedom to focus on what was most compelling, interesting etc. to you. The only restrictions are 1. That you discuss your opinions/feelings/impression in the context of what you have learned in the course An example: ” The detectives concluded that the [evidence] found [location] pointed to Curtis’ guilt, but according to [source] the [evidence] was unreliable due to [reason]. Had the detectives considered [issue/fact/data point/ other evidence] they might have pursued [other lead]. It alarms me how easily an unreliable piece of evidence can be seen different ways depending on what one believes about a suspect ‘s guilt. ” 2. That your opinions/reasoning are fact-based. Examples: It is my opinion that prosecutors should be required to [policy], because in X% of cases where a person has been exonerated, prosecutors failed to [behavior/action]. Even though mistakes happen, I disagree with those who argue that police should not be allowed to do [behavior/action]. I think this way because in many cases [behavior/action] is the only way to [positive outcome]. However, since we also know that [behavior/action] can lead to [problematic outcome], there should be restrictions on when/where police can [behavior/action] This is a relatively short paper, therefore, you should NOT spend much time summarizing the case itself. One or two paragraphs at most are sufficient to provide an overview of the case.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|