Williams describes the relevant background for the case, which is that crime in New York City was rampant in the 1980s, due in large part to the crack cocaine epidemic. Indeed, a chatgpt check reveals the conclusion that "The homicide rate in New York City today is roughly 4 to 13 times lower per capita than in 1984." This is an incredible reduction; it's the difference between night and day. So, we learn that the incident of 1984's "subway vigilante" has to be understood in the context of its unique place and time.
The incident in question happened on December 22, 1984. Onw of the youths leaned in close to Goetz and asked how he was doing. Goetz replied "fine"and avoided eye contact. A little while later the youth asked for, or demanded, five dollars. When Goetz saw "the smile on his face and the shine in his eyes", he snapped. He unloaded the five bullets into the four youths.
After the shooting, Goetz left the subway and fled the state. Nine days later he walked into a police station in Concord, New Hampshire and turned himself in, giving a complete statement of the incident.
In January prosecutors asked a grand jury to conisder four counts of attempted murder against Goetz, but the grand jury refused to indict, chosing to indict only on some minor gun charges. In March prosecutors were permitted to reopen the grand jury on the basis of new evidence coming to light. The "new evidence" was that two of the four youths were now willing to testify.
After hearing eight days of testimony, it was time for the grand jury to apply the law to the facts. The issue was whether Goetz's use of violent force was "reasonable". New York law at the time did not define this term, leaving two possible interpretations. The subjective test would look at whether the defendant sincerely felt threatened at the time he used force. The objective test would look at how society would expect a normal person to have behaved in the same situation. Neither approach was palatable to the prosecution, so the prosecutor presenting the case steered a middle course between the two possible interpretations.
The second grand jury then iudicted Goetz on all requested counts, but the presiding judge threw out the indictment, adopting more of a subjective standard. He concluded that the reasonableness of Goetz's actions depended on how he felt at the moment, not on how anyone else in his shoes would have acted. The state appealed, and in July of 1986, more than a year later, the appellate court by a 7-0 vote reinstated the indictment. The appellate court found that a "reasonable belief" contained both a subjective and an obective element.
The case finally went to trial, with jury selection taking four months. On April 27, 1987 the trial itself got started. On June 16, 1987 the jury returned a verdict of acquittal on all of the assault and attempted murder charges.
In concluding remarks, Williams expresses doubt that the case would come out the same way today. He points out that "The country is objectively much safer today than it was in 1984....Moreover, society overall is more willing today to try to understand people, their backgrounds, their motivations, and their behaviors. Today Goetz's victims would not have been reduced to caricatures; Goetz's oddities would have been regarded with concern, not eye rolls."
There is a principle in torts law that "you take your plaintiff as you find him." So, if you are out driving and get rear-ended, the other driver is responsible for all of your injuries, even if those injuries are more than what would be considered "normal" due to a special condition you have that makes you more vulnerable to being rear-ended. This principle was applied by the Geotz jury, in that they considerd Goetz's idiosyncracies in fining him not gulty. They took into account that he had been a victim of a prior mugging, and that the doorman at his apartment building had also been so victimized. The four youths who accosted Goetz are responsible for the consequences of their actions. They picked on the wrong guy.
"Five Bullets" is a highly readable and important book which examines the troubling issue of vigilantism in American life. There are frequent references to "Death Wish", the 1974 Charles Bronson movie which explores these same themes. There are no easy answers, but it is an issue which merits further exploration.
No comments:
Post a Comment