I Will Not Make a Pun about Worthy's Name

Kym Worthy, for starters, is not as eloquent a speechwriter as Kilpatrick (or Kilpatrick's speechwriters). However, she is not over-using pathos as Kilpatrick did. Worthy uses very little pathos in her message at all. She mainly tried to stick with facts, reason, and reputation. She pumped her message with ethos. Virtually throughout the whole message, she said in a myriad of ways that she and her legal teams are skilled, dovoted to justice, and working hard and honorably. Her message says that the team is on the side of fairness and of the people, for the common good. She says: "For the men and women in this office, doing things right trumps doing things fast and easy every time." The common conception of the American justice system is filled with either the idea that court cases are very long and drawn out and a waste of time, money, and energy, or, out of haste, things are rushed and not done well. Wisely, her next statement proclaims that not only do they work thoroughly and very well, but that "We serve you with independent thought – unbossed and unbought. We have taken orders and instruction from no one. The only body that has told us what to do is the body of the law. We started with clean slates and open minds. We have been careful, deliberate, thoughtful and analytical. Our decision is well reasoned, supported by the evidence, and autonomous." This "body of the law" statement is powerful; the law is supposed to be the all surrounding protector of American society and life. By proclaiming that the team worked under no one but the law, that gives her message ethos. Her team had not to deal with the often iniefficient ways people operate... especialy in government, as most people would agree. The law, however, changes not and cannot be impartial. She also goes on to say that the way they operate--in thoroughness, diligence, determination, honor, and truth--is unlike the 44-minute dramas people see on television. This statement elevates Worthy and her team to another leverl; it places them above the average person, which is necessary, seeing as how they are the esperts and the ones making very, very important decisions.

"The public trust was violated." ...Logos also fits well into Worthy's message. This case is not about lying about sex or getting into people's personal lives, she says. The purpose and goal of the case is to ensure justice is served. Too often the stature and/or power of an individual comes unfairly into play in the courtroom and cripples the proper administration of justice. Worthy has a logical, reasonable approach to this. She says in her message that witnesses are crucial to a case and justice could not be served without them. She reasons that it is unfair to expect the same complete truthfulness from all witnesses, but to punish different witnesses differently. Power, wealth, reputation, or status cannot excuse anyone from the law. Perjury is a crime and the punishment cannot depend on things that make that punishment unfair. Also logical is her list of the fundamental principles of justice, which she calls simple and says that we learn them as children. This logical argument is tough to counter... "even children understand that lying is wrong." How then could mature adults mess this up?

And that's a very good question--How did this whole scandal happen? And unfortunately, the answer to that question is much too easy.