Mock Trail: State v. Mann Reaction

Today the talk of the courtroom we listened in to the arguments for and against John Mann.  John Mann, a white man, is being accused of the assault and attempted murder of a slave named Lydia.  The slave in question was loaned to Mr. Mann by Ms. Elisabeth Jones, received a harsh beating, and then tried to flee the abuse.  It was during her attempted run from the beating, that Mr. Mann drawled his weapon and shot Lydia in her back. 

During their first trial, the state had brought the previously stated charge against Mr. Mann, who received a fine of 10 dollars for his crime.  This brings us to the courtroom today, as Mr. Mann has decided to appeal his fine. 

Arguments favoring enslaved Lydia followed a more humane trend. They spoke on how human life is a life, and how statutes under the law should apply to all people living within the state lines, regardless of skin tone.  The state gave many arguments based on ethical and moral dilemmas with Mr. Manns actions, however, these have yet to have an impact on the law.  Their main argument, which had legal backing, was that Mr. Mann was not the enslaver of Lydia.  This brought up how, with no real rights over the punishment of the slave, Mr. Mann should not have raised his hand against Lydia without the explicit consent of Ms. Jones.  This however being the strongest argument the State made within the case did not hold up against Mr. Manns defense.  

Once Mr. Manns lawyers took the floor, we heard the over-arching legal nature of his defense.  Mr. Mann had acted within the law of property ownership, seeing as enslaved people like Lydia were seen as property within the state.  This gave Mr. Mann a leg up within the courts as it was an actual legal argument.  This combined with the arguments of how the culture was brought the case to a close.

The presiding Judge Thomas Ruffin issued the new verdict that the defendant, Mr. John Mann, is not to pay the 10-dollar fine.  This case reminds us of how the Southern states see an enslaved individual as a piece of property, and the stark difference of both law and morals coming together.