Critical Thinking Essay

Submitted By EddieEscava
Words: 987
Pages: 4

Jack Riley's statement doesn't match up with his actions because he is trying to state that he cares about the land meanwhile he might be the source of the problem. His actions don't really change after his final appearance in court. I don't think Donna's pity for him is appropriate, obviously you always feel bad for some people but I don't think pity can be a factor in a case like this.
There attitudes were very much alike, they wouldn't answer Schlichtmann's questions when he interviewed them. Obviously personal honor isn't very important to each of them, they care more about keeping their jobs.
I don't understand Anne's decision not to get away from a land that brings back so many terrible memories, and the possibility of what had once happened, happening again to another one of her kids. I don't think it was really Jimmy's best interest to stay in Woburn , there are more outside factors playing in his decision. It may not be dangerous, but they are fighting the trial because they think that the water is contaminated and if that's what they think so they believe that it is dangerous to stay in Woburn and it is very possible for another one of their children to get contaminated.
I do agree with Facher's statement because women are usually very emotional and this may force them to look away from evidence. I don't think that he is correct by saying that a father may not find it difficult, but I don't think that's what he was trying to say. I think he was trying to say that women will generally look away from evidence more than men would.

Money is extremely important in winning a law suit mostly for the lawyers , and if research is needed in the a case ( such as this one ). but that doesn't conclude that the party with the bigger pocket will win the case, but it does give that party an advantage. It is very hard to present a case well from a position of financial disadvantage, especially when the other attorneys notice it.
In my opinion he is certainly obligated to inform the families because he is just there attorney and I don't think he should make there decision without informing them. The problems that might arouse do not make justify his secrecy, because in my opinion a person can live with his mistake but not with the mistake that another person puts on him.
I don't think that Schlichtmann's dealings with the eight Woburn families was fair because of the fact that he took the case out of their hands, which is not an essential method for an efficient prosecution. I agree with her complaints that he didn't let them have any control of their own case but I don't believe in any way that he did it for that reason because he literally gave up everything that he owned for that case.
Judge Skinners statement does accurately match up with the eight Woburn case families because the first time that Anne met up with Schlichtmann she told him that the families don't want money, they just want someone to take responsibility and to apologize. Also, after the parties came to a conclusion, the families weren't pleased with the fact that they were only getting money.
I think that judge skinner is slightly biased towards the defense because he asked the jury those three questions that were able to cut the trial

short. But even though that happened, I still don't think there's much truth to Schlichtmann's suspicions rather than being afraid to loose the trial.
10. I think it is true that non-experts can't really answer those types of question ( there basically just…