Reflection Time, Yo. Reflect on Meurault's trial and treatment by the justice system. Is his treatment fair? How do you feel about the participants in the trial (don't forget Meursault)? Do you think his treatment is realistic? 
This reflection should be at least 2, well-developed 11 sentence paragraphs and should include 4 quotations from the text.

Meursault’s trial and treatment by the justice system was not fair. Meursault was looked down upon because “sever[ed] himself from society,” (102) not because he killed a man. He was convicted of not “express[ing] and remorse” (101) after his mother died rather than murder. It is against society’s believes to not feel remorse about a family death, but it is not an illegal act worth sentencing a person to death. His lawyer even once said “’is my client of trial for burying his mother or for killing a man?’” (96)  because the trial failed to focus of the actual crime of murder.  Meursault has a different view than the rest of the French civilization and has a hard time articulating what he feels. He cannot fully understand or comprehend his emotions in his own mind, let alone express his feelings to others. He does not defend himself in trial. His lawyers get irritated when Meursault tries to talk and tell him to “just keep quiet, it won’t do your case any good” (98) because he does not say things that make him look innocent. He sounded “ridiculous” (103) when he spoke, and he knew it which is why he often kept quiet. He couldn’t articulate how the elements made him feel. He felt like the sun controlled him to murder, but he couldn’t figure out how to say this to other people. His actually case of murdering an Arab was overlooked by the court and instead he was convicted for his actions, such as not showing remorse, not crying at his mother’s funeral and not defending himself in court, which is unjust.

When witnesses were called to the stand in Meursault’s favor, they were not taken seriously because they did not give solid evidence and the court already knew they wanted to condemn the man. Thomas Perez, Maman’s ‘fiancé’ was the first witness. He did not help Meursault because Thomas “had seen [Meursault] only once” (91). Celeste was also not helpful because he claimed it was “bad luck” (92) that killed the Arab. Marie’s testimony did not help the case because it brought up the Meursault’s lack of grieve the day after Maman’s funeral. Raymond also failed to give hard evidence of Meursault’s innocence because the prosecutor asked questions of no value such as “’was he your friend’” (96).  Meursault had no way to win this trial. The jury was not impartial and the topic of the court was morals, not the actual crime. His inability to participate also made him feel like an alien at his own trial. He couldn’t say anything of value or articulate his feeling, even when given the opportunity. Sentencing to murder was unjust and unrealistic.