How do the resolutions of the stories of Tom Robinson and Boo Radley
complicate the relationship between the law and justice? answer in RACE format.

This question refers to the book "To Kill a Mockingbird."

In this book, we see that justice is not served in the case of Tom Robinson. Tom Robinson's trial was extremely biased. Even though Atticus performed an exemplary job, and all evidence pointed to Robinson's innocence, the court declared him guilty. Moreover, he was unable to appeal because a mob killed him. This shows that law pronounced him guilty, even though the just thing to do would have been to defend his innocence.

On the other hand, Boo Radley is actually responsible for the death of Bob Ewell, but he is not charged. In this case, justice is ambiguous. On the one hand, Boo Radley did commit a crime. On the other hand, he had good reason to do so, and his motives were noble. In terms of the law, we see that it does not react in the way it is meant to, as Boo Radley is not charged.

Both of these events show that the connection between law and justice is a complicated one. While lawyers and legislators try to create laws that go hand in hand with justice, this is not always easy, due to the many social situations that can complicate a case and can make it difficult to establish what the "just" outcome is.

d. because santiago thought any sharks would assume the marlin was part of the boat

i got ypu

explanation: