In the book Monster by Walter Dean Myers, should Steve Harmon have been found guilty? Use proof from the courtroom and his journal to support your answer.

The answer to this question is subjective; therefore, it is open to the interpretation of each reader. Some readers think that Steve should have been found guilty, while other readers think that justice was properly done.
Personally, I do not think that Steve should have been found guilty. A basic belief of the court system is that a person is innocent until he or she is proven guilty. While I may be suspicious of Steve's total involvement, there simply wasn't enough evidence presented to confirm Steve's guilt.
The prosecuting attorney is trying to convict Steve of felony murder for his alleged participation in Aguinaldo Nesbitt's death. Supposedly, Steve was a lookout. His job was to go into the drugstore and check to make sure that the coast was clear. He was then to signal Bobo and King. Steve does admit to some of that. He admits to walking into the store for some mints and walking out. Steve's confession proves that he was present, but it doesn't prove his participation.
Of course, an earlier flashback puts what Steve says or doesn't say into serious question for the readers. When Steve and his friend were throwing rocks, Steve's rock hit a woman. The woman's big, tough male friend approached the boys, and Steve let the man believe that Steve's friend threw the rock. Steve didn't say that his friend threw the rock, but Steve didn't admit to his role either. Steve could have used the same strategy in the courtroom.