"He who saves one life saves the world"

History and Democracy: This class blog will be used for all communication. All homework will be posted here and all online class discussions.


Monday, February 13, 2012

Bad Samaritan

Watch this video: The Bad Samaritan parts 1 & 2 and post comments below.


Eighteen-year-old David Cash chose to walk away as his friend, fellow eighteen-year-old Jeremy Strohmeyer, assaulted and murdered Sherrice Iverson, age 7, in the girls room of a Nevada casino at 3 in the morning. He told the Los Angeles Times when his friend was arrested that he was “not going to lose sleep over someone else’s problems.”

Clearly what Jeremy Strohmeyer did was reprehensible. What David Cash did was to choose to be a bystander, not to be a rescuer or a resister in any way. One can only speculate what might have happened had Cash more actively intervened. But according to Nevada law at the time, he was under no legal obligation to do otherwise.

As awful as the situation was, I’d like to hear your views on the situation. What do you think should have governed Cash’s actions? What obligations does a person who witnesses another wrong have? Are there different rules depending on the nature of the “wrong”?

41 comments:

Veronica Corninstone 4/5 said...

Personally, I feel that what Cash did was horrible. I cannot believe he would be alright with his friend even putting his hands on the girl let alone grabbing her and putting his hands over his mouth. I would have made hIm stop immediately. The worst part is that he did not even tell authorities about what his friend did until several days after. I would have called the police immediately

Hot Carl said...

In my opinion OU think cash should have definitely stepped in and have done something. At least he should have said something to someone. How can u let a person rape a little girl, or a person in general. Anyone with moral standings could have realized that he should have done something.

Hot Carl said...

I agree with veronica

blue dream 4/5 said...

I feel that this was a terrible action. The young man could've easily prevented this situation! Even if he didn't know that a murder was taking place he saw the young girl getting abused and and eventually found that murder had taken place. He should've gone to the police immidately after finding that she was killed. I feel that prosecuted should charge him with something because this girl would still be alive if he had done something!

4/5 TaylorSwift said...

Morals should have governed Cash's actions. Any person who witnesses some sort of wrongdoing has an obligation to at least attempt to do something about it. In this situation Cash could have not only told his friend to stop, but he could have told someone else what happened whether it be someone else at the casino so they could stop it or the police after the fact. There is no excuse for doing absolutely nothing. The fact that they were friends made it even worse that Cash couldn't stand up to him or stop him from doing something that was also going to hurt himself. I think there are different rules depending on the nature of the "wrong", I can understand if he were to stand idly by if doing something could put himself in serious danger or if the girl really was in no danger, but the fact of the matter is, the girl was screaming while his friend was restraining her so the argument that she wasn't in any danger isn't any good.

Sasha 4/5 said...

I do think that Cash should have chosen to take different actions in this situation, however I also don't think that he should be punished for not reporting the crime because at the time he probably didn't believe it when his friend said that he killed the girl and was probably in a limbo-like state when he should have reported it. However, if he had known that his friend was going to rape and kill the girl he would probably take into consideration what mental state his friend is in and that if he is willing to rape and kill this 7-year-old then he would probably be willing to hurt Cash as well. Self preservation is a key to this. The obligations of a witness do depend on the crime and what area they are in. If you are in a bathroom with the other person then you don't have anything or anyone backing you up to do something.

Jay.Aaron 4/5 said...

David decided to not do or say anything to his friend Jeremy to stop what was about to happen. Even though he didn't know what was about to happen, I believe he could've still stopped his friend from messing with the young child. I think if maybe Cash had viewed that little girl as a family member of some sort, he would've stepped in and made a difference. In my opinion, a person who witnesses something like that, is obligated to at least tell authorities what happen. I don't think there are rule that apply depending on the nature. Right is right, and wrong is wrong in any situation. I too agree with Veronica. This was a terrible situation that could have ended in a different way but because someone wanted to be a bystander, it didn't.

4/5 Rainbow_Fairy said...

It seems as though Cash has done something wrong. The truth is that he acted normally in a situation that nobody wants to be a part of. I feel that his actions were normal, and that it isn't fair to convict him for something that he hasn't done. The law punishes people for crimes that they've done, not things that they have not. The question at the end, "Would you have acted differently if you could go back in time..." Isn't a fair question because it is implying that if he had known what was going to happen would he have stopped it. He didn't know, he didn't think his friend capable of murder, and the majority of people would have done the same thing rather than stand up against their best friend. I agree with Veronica that I would like to think that I would do the right thing and stop him or contact the authorities, but when the time comes to act it is difficult to do what you know is morally correct. Cash did not commit a horrible act, his friend did.

Sasha 4/5 said...

I also agree with Hot Carl because he could and should have at least said something to someone after the fact before the police had to figure it out themselves.

Riley 4/5 said...

I think that Cash should have realized what his friend was doing was wrong from the moment he saw him go into the women's bathroom. Jeremy should not have been in there let alone strangling this little girl. Cash's claim that he did not know the little girl and did not believe anything bad would happen is not a good enough reason. I agree with Veronica that I would have made him stop or tell authorities immediately even if he was a good friend.If a person witnesses another wrong, I believe that they have the obligation to report it. I do not think that knowing a person should determine whether or not a person gets help for someone in danger. If something happening is wrong then it is wrong no matter what. Witnessing someone in trouble should be an automatic trigger to do something to help them, even if its just calling the police. Any action big or small can go a long way, and certainly in this case it could have saved a little girl.

4/5 TaylorSwift said...

I agree with blue dream that even if Cash didn't thing the girl was going to be murdered, she was clearly being abused and something could have been done to stop it. At the very least, Cash could have gone to the police to turn his friend in after he admitted to murdering the girl.

Veronica Corninstone 4/5 said...

I agree with blue dream when they say that, even though cash did not know about the murder, he should have immediately stopped his friend when he saw him even putting his hands on the girl. I think this is horrific.

British.Broadcasting.Company said...

Although what David Cash did is not ok, its not right, its not cute, its not fun, HOWEVER the fact that he did not have charges pressed against him is the correct, i repeat correct occurrence. What obligations does a person who witnesses another wrong have; I'll tell you, none. A person does not have another obligation to ANYONE, while this is not morally right it's just the way it is. There are different rules depending on the wrong, if there is a serious crime there SHOULD be a report however there is no obligation or legal obligation. Also if he was black and the girl was white he would most likely be in jail...just saying.

Willy Bob said...

I feel that Cash is an awful person and that he should have stopped Jermey. If I saw one of my friends go into the girls bathroom with a little girl I would stop them immediately. I agree with Veronica about Cash not telling anybody about what Jeremy told him. He should have told people as soon as it happened. I also think that Cash's morals should have told him to not be an idiot and do something.

Turquoise 4/5 said...

I think Cash's actions should have been governed by a sense of morality. Although he was trying to protect his friend, we all have an obligation to report wrongdoings as if we are witnesses to them. There are not different rules depending on what the act is because no one should be able to get away with doing something that is potentially harmful to another human being. The little girl was innocent and could have been saved if only Cash would've stepped in and wasn't a bystander.

45Evangeline said...

Since I have a 7-year-old brother and sister I feel what Cash did was disgusting even if he did not foresee the output of the scenario I believe that an 18-year-old man alone in a stall with a 7-year-old girl does not project any reasonable or good situation. Although I do question what a 7-year-old was doing in a casino and where her father was when this occurred? And also, how did they all wind up in a women's restroom? i feel that at the very least Cash should be prosecuted for negligence. And he should be kicked out of Berkeley since Joe Paterno was fired for not taking further action against his best friend's crime against a minor. They directly relate to one another and it would make most sense to remain consistent.

Essie 4/5 said...

I think that David Cash should have felt the responsibility to report his friends action to someone that has power to do something about it. He should have told his friend Jeremy to leave the girl alone, when he was in the bathroom, before something bad was going to happen. It was probably obvious to David Cash that nothing good was going to come out of the situation when he physically saw his friend putting his hand over Sherrice's mouth and hurting her. A person has several obligations when it comes to witnessing another person's wrong doings. Many people choose to be bystanders, which is what David Cash chose to do. In my opinion, you can't be a bystander in a situation like this because so many things could go wrong, like what happened in this situation. There are different rules depending on the nature of the "wrong" and what type of situation it is. This incident could have easily been stopped if David Cash told Jeremy that what he was doing was wrong, or if he went directly to the police to report what was going on. I agree with Taylor Swift about how morals should have governed David Cash's actions. He could have saved someone's life, and the fact that they were best friends isn't any excuse to not do anything about the situation.

stevie 4/5 said...

I think a person has no obligation to do anything in these type of situations. What if David Cash would've tried to stop the crime and Jeremy killed both David Cash and Sherrice Iverson? That is why I believe a bystander has no obligation to do anything. This is also why I believe there are no rules pertaining to this.

Dale Doback 4/5 said...

Seeing what Cash did makes me very angry. I cannot believe that he would sit there and watch a young girl get restrained by a grown man. His morals should have governed him to stop the abuse. Even if he didn't think she would be raped and killed, even seeing his friend put his hands on a little girl should have been enough to put an end to it. A person who witnesses actions like this is always obligated to help the victim. They need to imagine the victim was someone they were close to and try to see how it would feel. There may be different rules depending on the nature of the wrong, however, to me it is always the right decision to help the victim. I agree with Veronica that is was ridiculous that Cash didn't tell the authorities until several days later.

rainbow1216 4/5 said...

I think what David Cash did was wrong. I believe that he thinks that what he did was wrong also, but doesn't want to publicly express it. Cash saying that he didn't find anything wrong with his best friend following a seven year old girl into a girls bathroom and putting her in a stall with his hand over her mouth trying to muffle her screams is unjust. I can't believe that a person would sit there knowing what is happening to this little girl and do nothing. Best friend or not murdering anyone or rape is never okay. I think that he should have had to face some consequences for not saying anything or taking any action for what he witnessed. I think anyone should be punished for not speaking up whenever they have witnessed something as serious as that. I agree with blue dream about the consequences that David should have had to face.

Billie Jean 4/5 said...

It is extremely difficult to hear that something so atrocious happened and it could have been prevented. Cash's actions, or lack thereof, could have saved a child's life. His moral responsibilities should have governed his actions, but did not. This is clearly a special case because I think that if anyone else had walked into the bathroom while the rape was occurring, they would have tried to stop it. Morally, I think people should be obligated to try to interfere. If you see something happening and do nothing, it's just as much your fault as it is the person actually doing it.

British.Broadcasting.Company said...

I agree with most of the previous comments, i agree with Veronica what he said was horrible.

Still if he was black and the girl was white he would be in jail...just saying.

45Evangeline said...

I agree with Willy Bob since he also said that he went into the nextstall so why else would he follow into the women's bathroom!

4/5 British.Broadcasting.Company said...

4/5

White goodman 4/5 said...

I believe that moral obligation should have governed his actions in the situation. It is the responsibility of all people to help their fellow man. If there is a violent crime going on and you can stop it, then you must stop it. The only possible explanation for his disregard for others is that he has some sort of mental disease. I agree with Veronica Corninstone that It is ridiculous that even after his friend confessed to the crime he still did not turn him in

Turquoise 4/5 said...

I agree with Taylor Swift because there is always a way to stop a bad situation if you have the courage to do it. There was no reason for Cash to sit by and watch without reporting the incident. By not turning in his friend, was a test of his morality and he was too worried about getting in trouble himself but he ended up getting in trouble anyway.

Siri 4/5 said...

I think that Cash should of tried to stop his friend from raping/killing the Sherrice. I understand that he didn't want to be a part of what his friend was doing but it was a little girl they shouldn't of been in the bathroom together to begin with. Sense cash new that they shouldn't of been in the bathroom together he should of grabbed his friend out of the bathroom or went and told someone what was going on. Ultimately Cash could of prevented the murder and should of done so.

OFWGKTA45 said...

I think what david did was wrong in everyway. But you have to look at it his point of view what he thought was wrong and what everyone else thought was wrong. He should have told the police even if it was his bestfriend. I agree with hot carlhe could and should have at least said something to someone after the fact before the police had to figure it out themselves.

Billie Jean 4/5 said...

I strongly agree with Taylor Swift. Even if Cash didn't do anything to stop the rape and murder, he still could have reported his friend to the police.

Siri 4/5 said...

I agree with Veronica because Cash should of done something about it.

Preach 4/5 said...

Cash should have we the jail for a number of reasons. One he stood by and let his bestfriend rape a 7 year old girl in the womans bathroom. His excuses dont add up, first of all they were in the bathroom for more than 20 mins! and Cash said that he saw Jeremy restraining the little girl. Had it been two black guys and a white little girl both guys would have been in jail or both recieved the death penatly. The obligations a witness should have are telling the police or at least stoping the person that is doing wrong, no matter who they are. There no different rule on depending on the nature of "wrong"!! I agree with blue dream when he say cash should have been punished and not able to walk away without any consequences

IChiefGreenGrowingTrees said...

Well I think David Cash was just scared of his friend. What I would have done as soon as I seen what was going on I would of got involved and that might of been the end of a friendship, like if i didnt do anything to stop it and my best friend told me he killed her i would of told him goodnight, stay away from me, and have fun in jail. Like if my best friend shot someone i wouldnt tell on him but he raped someone and killed the person.

Reader 4-5 said...

I am disgusted at what I saw on this documentary! I can not believe a seven-year-old girl was raped and murdered in a bathroom stall, and David Cash stood by and did nothing. What also disgusts me is the fact that Cash told reporters and police, "I didn't think this girl was in danger. At first, her and Jeremy were just throwing paper towels at one another. Just looked like they were fooling around." Body language is not just the solution to stop something like this from happening. David Cash needed to go into the stall, and words and action needed to be done on his part. If I were in his situation, I would've ran in the bathroom, seriously demanded Jeremy to stop assaulting this young girl, and put some kind of threat on him. I wouldn't care if this destroyed a friendship because at this particular moment, the girl's life matters. Cash could've been rewarded as a hero for a good deed instead of being known as the bystander in a horrible crime. I believe Cash is a criminal because by standing a few feet away from the scene watching, he is considered an accomplice. He should be expeled and spend some time in jail for his lack of remorse for what he did and his ability to only think of what might have happened to him in this case. Most important, he should apologize to this girl's mother for not helping her daughter when he could.

SnoopDogg 9* said...

i feel like what David cash did was terrible and the worst thing you could do in a situation like that. He shouldve said something to the authorities. Even though he was his friend, he shouldve said something to someone. It makes me sick that David was ok with the whole situation. the first thing i wouldve done was tell someone stopped him from doing it. I get that he didnt want to get involved with the murder but walking away from the scene without saying someone was very wrong. And even though he was his friend, he should realize that you shouldnt be friends or be with anyone that does such cruel things like that.

Flary 9* said...

I feel that Cash is a terrible person because he didn't do anything to stop the situation. If I saw even my nearest and dearest friend taking a young girl into the bathro I would know it was bad news and would do anything to stop them. This shows a lot about Cash's morals as a person because he stood by and allowed this to happen. Shame on him.

Anonymous said...

MJ 4/5 In my opinion Cash was wrong in every-way because he knew what his friend was going to do if he had a seven year old girl in the bathroom stall with him and her mouth is covered up. I also agree with what "Evangeline said when they said what is a seven year old girl even doing in the casino", granite the father was there she still shouldn't have been there and if her dad was there why didn't he ever wonder where his daughter went after the fact she had left.

Reader 4-5 said...

I agree with Veronica in the fact that Cash should've immediately gone to the authorities and told them what happened. I also agree with TaylorSwift because Cash, who was Jeremy's best friend, made the situation all the worse. He let their friendship wither away by letting him get away with something that was going to hurt himself; this is not a true friend. It would be understandable if Cash were defending Jeremy for different reasons and if the girl was not in danger. But in the case of murder, them being "best friends forever" should end right at that point.

Dill 9 said...

I agree with SnoopDogg. Cash should have realized that what his friend was doing was wrong. He said that because he didn't think the girl's life was in jeopardy he didn't verbalize his disgust with his friend at the time. And although he saw his friend restraining the girl and muffling her screams, he chose to walk out of the bathroom and do nothing. The fact that he didn't stand up to Strohmeyer just shows how cowardly he was in that situation. Clearly Cash didn't challenge his friend's actions because he was trying to protect himself. He even said in the interview that when a person sees something like that happening that's not a situation that he wants to be in, which is why he should have stopped it. Something I don't understand is he claimed that they (Cash and Strohmeyer) were best friends. If Cash had intervened, he could have potentially saved the little girl's life and prevented her from being raped, prevented his best friend from going to jail for life, and been an upstander. There would literally be no downside in trying to help the girl. Although situations that require upstanders to step in are not always as severe as this example, people should always speak up if they see things like this.

Sourpatchkid11 said...

I think Cash should have assumed something was unusual as soon as he saw his friend go into the women's bathroom. Cash's claim that he did not know the little girl and did not suspect anything bad or unusual is not any excuse for standing by while someone else is murdered. This situation reminds me of Joe Pa when he didn't say anything to protect those kids, although he had the knowledge of the situation. People get too caught up in the consequences they might face rather than thinking about the extreme situations they could be preventing. I agree with Veronica that our friendship wouldn't have meant a lot in light of telling the authorities information that could compensate for another's life. We are all obligated to live morally, and be respect of one another. This includes reporting those who violate this mutual respect. I do not think previous relationships should change the objective way you look at someones behavior.

sushine 9 said...

I think that Cash had a moral obligation to that young girl to stand up and defend her. He said that it wasnt his business but he will probably relive that moment in his head for the rest of his life. He will have to live with the thought that he could have saved her. I think that its disgusting that he didnt feel the need to go to the authorities to protect his own reputation. Of course not every situation is as extreme as this scenerio but we can learn that we must put others aboe ourselves when it comes to general safety.

Hpesoj 9th said...

I think Cash was wrong, for just letting that happen. He should have stepped in and intervened. That's horrible that he just watched the little girl get raped. I think someone has somewhat obligation, but not always. I think morals play a better role than obligation. Morals make the decision. I agree with Taylor Swift.