ABSTRACT
This chapter suggests that mitigation is a nuanced process that is at times able to challenge the cultural master narrative. Mitigation is far too complex and nuanced to support a simple conclusion that mitigation supports hegemonic individualism. The report's use of statistical probabilities is a key ingredient in constructing a subversive narrative that offers a useable alternative to the hegemonic tale of autonomous individualism. Similarly, the mitigation case in Roger's trial also attempted to contextualize Roger's life experiences. Some defendants simply have less structural mitigation in their life histories or do not have any good record of their past experiences and therefore do not provide the attorneys with an opportunity to challenge the cultural master narrative. The final defense strategy was to try to humanize the defendant by showing him embedded in a web of social relationships. Defense attorneys do not just focus on defendants' individual agency or personal characteristics, and they do not rely solely upon de-contextualizing discourses.
