I definitely think that one of the more important things to see here is how people can change. It said that Jonathon Nobles didn't even say anything at his trial, he was convicted off his own confession and didn't flinch when his sentence was read. Then at the end of the story he was apologizing profusely to the family of the ones he killed and giving heart felt apologies and thanks. Meanwhile he had used a correspondent and a confidant, Steve Earle, as a way to change himself and to make things better. In turn, I also feel like he affected Steve Earle to want to better himself and see an improvement in both of them. It's important to note that even people who are considered to be "bad" people can still change and possibly help those around them to see their errors and stop before things end up too sour. I think this also points to how we can look in the change that comes to a person in jail, and to reasons why the death penalty has been abolished in most states. This can represent that there is still hope in change that can come around in a person, which is what is asked by the author in the end.

I think what is most impressive about this story is the impact that Jon's change has on other people. I think by showing other people that he can go from a murderer to a religious, loving person can open the public's eyes to the fact that change is possible, even for people who commit horrific crimes. A man who committed murder has gained respect and friendship of people around him like the prison clerk, the guards giving him extra time and a receptionist at the prison telling Earle how, "Jon's a good guy" (386). I think it is obvious he has changed, but the fact is that he committed terrible crimes 12 years ago and under the law has to pay for them. It is possible for people to change, but it is hard to forget what they did in the past.