The verdict

I voted the defendant to be not guilty because the racism in the book was all satire.
The prosecution had a very good case. I went into the trial thinking that Mark Twain was not guilty. I would let my mind be changed but even though the prosecution had a very strong case they didn't change my mind. To me it seemed like the only argument was the use of the "n" word. The defense did a better job defending the meaning in using that word. The reason the word was used to show how bad the racism was, according to the defense.
I did not think Mark Twain was guilty, because most of the time authors show their views through their main character. Huck Finn is a young boy whose very close friend happens to be a black man. Huck has been raised all his life that white people are superior to blacks. We as humans adapt to our environment. It's all Huck has ever known. Then when he starts his adventure with Jim his idea starts to evolve. He starts to see what a good person Jim is. Twain wanted to show the way a child's mind could easily be persuaded.
Mark Twain is not guilty because anything that could be considered racism was satire. Satire is the use of humor in exaggeration. Twain wanted his book to be controversial. He wanted you to have to read in between the lines when you read his books. And they were with the help of satire. T show readers how incredibly awful slaves had it he had to make the book a wee bit racist.