Nathan and Сфдуиэы (Caleb) trial constitution violations

Issues with the Maycomb Trial Decision

By Coronovirus and a little bit of caleb the non-writer

The sixth amendment to the United States constitution states that all people being prosecuted for a crime have the right to, among other things, the right to an impartial jury. This clearly violated Tom’s rights as the jury had a African-American’s word against the word of two white men, and unanimously chose the white option even though they could have done a medical test on Mayella. The jury didn’t seem to even question Meyella’s word, and didn’t seem to think much about Tom Robinson’s word or Atticus’ speech. Atticus made the good point of the constitution saying that all men were equal, and that the people had America had been built on the founding conditions of making a place where everyone had the same rights. By that account, even if Tom Robinson was guilty, they should have still found solid proof that he raped Mayella. 

Secondly, the trial also somewhat violated the sixth amendment in that no witnesses or tests were sought after on behalf of Tom Robinson. The 6th amendment states that “to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor”. No medical tests were conducted on Mayella, and no witnesses were even called in Tom Robinson’s favor. They could have at least called on his family or something but they didn’t even try to do anything or force more people to testify to act as a witness for Tom Robinson. If they had gotten a first hand account from Meyellas siblings that could have freed Tom Robinson and convicted Mr. Ewell. The Maycomb county trial involving Meyela was not constitutional because it violated Tom Robinson’s sixth amendment rights to a witness, tests, or other forms of evidence in his favor.