Mr Washington - Earl Washington Case Study

Upon even a superficial examination, the Earl Washington case clearly illustrates numerous fallacies both in critical thinking and judgment. From the initial interview to the moment of release, Throughout Mr. Washington's ordeal he was subjected to biases and misjudgments ranging from the ignorant to the seemingly malicious. His story should be utilized to enlighten both the general population and, more importantly, those within the field, to the serious consequences resulting from a lack of critical thinking.

Mr. Washington's first encounters with the police were riddled with incorrect assumptions and biases. First, and perhaps most important, I find it difficult to believe that the police were unaware that their suspect was a little different and that perhaps they should consult a psychologist. The disabilities or even oddities of a 22 year old with the mental capabilities of a 10 year old seem difficult to overlook. If the officers had chosen to consult with a psychologist as to the best way to question Mr. Washington, the entire ordeal could have been avoided.

Secondly, while I acknowledge that Mr. Washington certainly had committed a violent crime and thus provided reason to question him as to other, similar unsolved crimes, questioning him about crimes for which his present crime provided no evidence in making that link was another serious error on the part of the officers, and only illustrated their desire to solve these crimes no matter who takes the fall. While it is impossible to definitively state why the police continued to see Mr. Washington as the perpetrator of these crimes despite his obvious lack of knowledge of any of them, it is clear that the officers were either under extreme pressure to solve the crimes, harboring racist attitudes, or operating under some other motive. Bringing the true perpetrator to justice did not appear to be their ultimate goal, illustrated by their lack of acknowledgment of Mr. Washington's deficient knowledge of the crime.

Within the initial trial, the biggest lapse in judgment falls on the shoulders of Washington's defense attorney. Whether due to his abilities as a lawyer or his bias towards his client's confession or perhaps both, Mr. Washington was clearly not provided his right to a fair judicial process. It appears from court transcripts that Washington's lawyer took his client's confession at its word and then simply put his client in the hands of the jury. Here again, we see yet another instance where simply questioning what else could possibly be going on here or whether any detail had been missed or overlooked, could have saved this man years of his life.

From this point forward Mr. Washington not only had to deal with the more general biases individuals possessed about him, but also with the bias of the persistence of impressions despite evidence proving otherwise. As humans we are susceptible to this very stubborn

...