Sat 7 Nov 2009
This crime is horrifying.
The 2009 Richmond High School gang rape occurred on Saturday, October 24, 2009, in Richmond, a San Francisco suburb of California, U.S., when a 15-year-old female student of Richmond High School was reported as repeatedly raped by a group of young males in a courtyard on the school campus while a homecoming dance was being held in the gymnasium.
On the “bystander effect“:
Meg Bossong ['05], coordinator of Community Education and Outreach at the Boston Area Rape Crisis Center, said the case suggested elements of the bystander effect, in which people are less likely to respond to an emergency when there are others around.
“That idea [is] that the more people there are around, the fewer people will get involved because there’s a diffusion of responsibility,” she said. “Not stepping in sends the message that it’s not such a big deal. … This is something that we hear a lot about around crime and also around sexual assault.”
The element of sexual violence in the alleged attack at Richmond High School may have contributed to observers’ apparent inaction.
“Because the weapon in sexual assault is a sex act, people see that as private,” Bassong said, even though such violence is a community issue. “There’s a complexity to it that may not exist if the weapon was not sexual.”
The problem can be exacerbated, she added, by confusing messages from movies, television and pornography, which can portray relationships involving power and dominance as acceptable, healthy sexual behavior.
Meg is a wonderful person who was very involved in R.A.S.A.N. (Rape And Sexual Assault Network) during her time at Williams.
How many current Williams student attended a school like Richmond High? Williams alumni have thousands of children under the age of 18 right now. How many of them go to places like Richmond? I have never heard of one . . .
Print • Email| « Yankees Win | NESCAC Updates, 3 teams in Finals tomorrow » |
38 Responses to “Confusing Messages”
Leave a Reply
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post
If a comment you submitted does not show up, please email us at eph at ephblog dot com. Please note that commenters are required to use a valid email address when submitting comments.
kthomas says:
“Ummm…” last I was there, Richmond High did not have windows because of the obvious reason that passersby liked to shoot at students. The above reporting is ignoring the obvious; Richmond isn’t Berkeley isn’t San Francisco isn’t Orinda.
frank uible says:
If only we as a society would get out and use our weinie guillotines, the prospect of one going through the remainder of life with a much forshortened member might have a not insignificant deterrent effect….
JeffZ says:
Of course, horrific group sex crimes aren’t confined to schools like these. I recommend reading Our Guys, about the Glen Ridge group sexual assault of a developmentally impaired teenager; the book serves as an indictment of an entire town culture, but of course the perpetrators engaged in just an unimaginable act of evil. And sex crimes more generally, especially sex crimes by adults against children, are unfortunately incredibly common across every conceivable demographic and economic level. From what I’ve seen, for example, there is zero correlation between an interest in production and distribution of child pornography and intellectual or financial characteristics of the offenders.
Another '05 Eph says:
David, how did you even find that article? Thank you for the lovely compliment, anyway.
You’re right that what happened there was a horrifying crime. I think that at least part of the horror stems from the fact that we’re looking at this situation and wondering how so many people could have witnessed and known about the attack and not done anything. All of us like to imagine that, in the same situation or with the same knowledge, we would have acted differently. Unfortunately, the odds are against us, for reasons that are entirely valid, chief among them that we’re not always certain what the right response is and also that especially in a situation involving violence, that the violence we’re witnessing will not be turned on us if we intervene.
The other impulse that those of us outside that community have is to “other” this assault and this community, because if Richmond High School is not like the high school we went to or that our children attend(ed), or the high schools that our classmates came from, then something like this can get filed safely away under “horror stories from failing schools.”
Ken, you’re right that Richmond isn’t Berkeley or San Francisco, or Orinda. My understanding of the community is that it is struggling with a similar kind of demographic transition as other communities who used to be able to depend on manufacturing and service-sector jobs that are now disappearing, with gang affiliation or involvement of its kids, and with a school system that may or may not be preparing the students for a life after high school. All of those are challenging and difficult factors, and all of them are things that exist outside of Richmond, in places like upstate NY, western PA, western and northeastern MA, and elsewhere.
I thought this was an excellent article, that strives to pull out some larger lessons. It also presents an uncomfortable truth: there was an atmosphere that existed at Richmond High School that made people believe that such an attack was acceptable. That atmosphere exists at a thousand other schools, workplaces, and communities. One quote that still turns my stomach was from WCCUSD spokesperson Marin Trujillo: “The dance itself was a successful event.”
It sounds so familiar to me, because something very similar was said here in Melrose, MA, after the after-school program coordinator and coach at the Melrose YMCA was arrested and charged with several counts of rape and other charges:
The perpetrator in that case had already been fired from the Reading and Andover YMCAs over serious allegations of sexual misconduct with youth in those programs.
Even if we didn’t come from high school “like Richmond,” I imagine that Reading, Andover, and Melrose are very much like the communities that many of us come from, live in, or are raising our families in. And what I hear in those two quotes is that at the administrative level, there is a tolerance for a certain acceptable level of violence and victimization. That message is communicated to everyone—employees or faculty, parents, and children—every day that sexual harassment (in the form of comments, texts/emails/notes, gestures, etc.), sexual assault (in the form of groping, bra strap-snapping, and “jimmy taps”) and bullying are allowed to go on.
I feel a deep empathy for the survivor and bystanders in that courtyard, because I can imagine the terror and powerlessness that they were feeling. I wish that someone had given them concrete advice on what to do to stop it happening, or better yet to stop the behaviors that led up to it from happening, but I’m not angry at them. I am angry at the schools and communities around not just these youth, but most youth, for saying (either explicitly or implicitly) that this is not worth the trouble of intervention, or worse, it is, but that there will be no support from anyone else if you do intervene.
Obviously, I can go on for quite some time on this subject, but I’d rather leave everyone feeling empowered and hopeful. This booklet was written by some of the foremost experts in my field on the subject of bystander intervention. If you’re in the Greater Boston area (roughly speaking, anywhere inside the Rte. 128 loop), my colleagues and I are available for workshops based on that scholarship and research for in-school and out-of-school programs, workplaces, faith communities, parent groups, and others. You can feel free to contact me at mbossong AT barcc dot org or through our the phone number on our website.
Kirsten says:
I’m not sure what you mean by “a school like Richmond High” – a public high school? a school where rapes happen? A place where teens are confused by the messages they receive from our society about sex and sexuality? (Hmmm, I suspect my high school would qualify on all counts.) Could you elaborate?
David says:
With looking for data, I would wager that Richmond is a school filled with low IQ students, and all the pathologies associated therewith.
Kirsten says:
I’m so horrified by your comment at #6, David, that I barely know where to begin. And here I was thinking that for once you’d managed a pretty good post without anything offensive in it.
Because *obviously* anyone who goes to a public high school has a low IQ? I beg to differ. Because *obviously* anyone who would commit rape – or is raped – has a low IQ? All the top elite colleges have rapes occur just like the “lowly” community colleges do.
Never mind, I can’t do this. You sicken me, you really do.
Another '05 Eph says:
I have to be honest that I imagined this conversation going a little differently.
David, as the parent of two young children, and really just as a human being, I imagine that this story must be very, very frightening. It’s disturbing for me, too.
I knew what you meant when you said “a school like Richmond” and I don’t think you’re alone in hoping that there’s something about the way that students at Richmond and their parents are different from you and your children and their school, and that those differences are what caused the assault. Unfortunately, the data does not support that.
Although there are particular challenges to working with gang-involved and gang-affiliated youth, those challenges are much like working with fraternity-affiliated or sports-involved students, as all are environments where masculinity and social standing are very closely tied to group norms and where hypermasculinity beliefs (consistently a risk factor for perpetration of sexual violence) are both widely and intensely held.
I was at a conference this spring where the keynote speaker was Patty Wetterling. One thing that she said that resonated with me, is that after her son was taken, everyone wanted to help them find Jacob and the man who took him, but nobody wanted to find them in their family, or their church, or their community. We like our sex offenders to be monsters, because it’s much easier to imagine running through The Frank Uible Pocket Guillotine(R) or banishing them to some highway underpass in Florida. These things that we’re talking about are monstrous and unfortunately, they’re being done by people we know who are not so different from us in a few key ways.
I’m leaving for a conference now, but I’m happy to discuss this with you further in person or over the phone.
Jr. Mom says:
Another ‘05:
I have been skirting this post for all the obvious reasons, and also found Dave’s comment really disturbing. But you handled it so well, and have shed so much insight, not just on the event, but on the complicated feelings and reactions most of us experience as a result of something so incomprehensible. Thank you so very much.
David says:
No. My genius wife went to a public school. The public high school in my town is filled with high IQ kids (and very few low IQ kids).
No. But IQ does correlate with crime. Background reading here. People with low IQ commit many more crimes than people with high IQ.
You think that the rate of criminality at a place like Williams is identical to the rate at a place like Richmond High? I would take the other side of that bet. How many of the students who walk in the door at Richmond tomorrow have been arrested? How many have served time in a juvenile facility?
What data are we talking about? Let’s compare Richmond High School with the North Newton High School (the high school in my neighborhood). You really think that crime rate, the arrest rate, and any other measure aren’t radically different between these two schools? I will take the other side of that.
Anyway, first we need to establish if there is a difference in the phenomenon we are interested in. (Rapes are probably rare enough that we are better off focusing on a broader measure of crime.) Once we reach agreement on that, we can discuss why there is a difference. Kirsten asked me. (Note that I did not give my views until I was asked.) I gave her my honest answer. I would be curious about what explanations others would provide.
kthomas says:
@Another ‘05 Eph:
Good evening from Berlin (middle of the night, actually).
I want to clarify that I knew students from Richmond and El Cerrito very well while at Berkeley. I don’t want to oppose your statements; I glanced at this thread after landing at Schoenefeld and, when I get to David’s statements on IQ, pathology, and later… I want to assert that there are “other factors.”
With more time, I might rant a little. I am, ultimately, more concerned with what we can do, than with analysis. Analysis may be misleading. But whatever “pathologies of everyday life” occur at Richmond, they are “more multifaceted and complex.”
I have some other thoughts from the day, which may have something to do with this topic– though the United States is far away for me, now.
I began the day with a local train from Gent to Bruxelles-Midi. The young woman across from me was from Egypt; she spoke on the phone for most of the trip, in a mixture of Belgian French and what seemed Egyptian Arabic and else.
One and a half hours in Brussels, exploring the environs and taking photos. Brussels was a relief: French.
I’ve been in Gent, not to learn Dutch, but to learn something of the local dialects. For that matter, I’ve only been working on varieties of Nederlaands for a few months. File this under Guadino’s “uncomfortable learning” and read on, if you will.
Brussels to Aachen, Thalys express. Once you rise into the mountains, the physical geography is very similar to Vermont, upstate New York along the border, and the Bershires. Except it is densely populated, insomuch as a few millions live there.
From Brussels to Aachen, other languages emerged. The Slavics: Czech and Russian. Turkish, Arabic. There was a small incident on the train, between a group of Turks and a older German man and others– typical of the racial tensions of these areas.
Two hours in Aachen. 1500 photos. “Wir sind Aachen. Es sind kein Nazis.” Was that the placard everywhere? Rather oversimplifed, and ignorant of history. But.
Local from Aachen to Koeln. A “Russian” family, I should say, a local family which spoke Russian, sat across from me. The father asked me, — right after asking his wife– in fairly poor German, if this was the train to Koeln.
After having listened to most of their conversation for the ten minutes before, I imitated Russian as best I could and told him the vlak was going to Koeln.
Cologne. It’s been a long while. Suddenly, I felt oddly– and linguistically– at home. Here I could understand everyone without much effort.
Two hours later, in West Berlin– I got another lesson in dialect. “Meins” und “deins” are not exactly expressions I learned at Williams or Berkeley, not to mention the rest.
Cologne-Bonn Airport to Berlin Schoenefeld Flughafen. Between the clouds, a landscape that is uniquely– almost uniquely– German. Other lessons from the plane (abk.).
Berlin. Here. In Gent– in Brussels, I am largely at home, comfortable. French is accepted, my Dutch will do. In Gent, I won’t walk into a bar or restaurant without local friends, unless I’ve been there and know someone– because–
I had began to think this was “about me.” In Gent– a library, a store, a supermarket– each of these come with a burden attached. It takes a large amount of effort to interact, to listen closely enough to catch most of what is going on– any distraction, means I’m missing the next two sentences.
Dialectical Belgian Dutch– I’m using that phrase, but simple “Flaams,” as a separate language and culture, is appropriate as well– and on the table here in Berlin tomorrow– in short, is an overlap of French and English and German (and old French and old English and old German)– and you can find the old indo-europeean roots still alive, words such as na’ar and ma’ar, which overlap almost directly with Hindi.
Other words and expressions– pronunciation and transliteration vary. “Uit” is “out” — pronounced as “out in English– it means closer to German “aus” — and it is pronounced as “out,” except when it is not. And often it is not.
Repeat this across the entire field of the language, and the languages. Across Europe, at least.
In Berlin, even with the dialects, I find I have no problem, no discomfort, walking into a restaurant or bar. My German is rusty and stilted; I make errors (though– it has never been clear to me, how much der, die, das matters to the average German, insomuch as the dialects, the local variations before standardization, still survive and do not conform to Hauptdeutsch).
Think then– to get back to the original topic– of the matter of linguistic exclusion (as well as uncomfortable learning). Think of the barriers of expression and understanding between the native Turkish speakers between Brussels and Aachen, and the Dutch and German and French speakers– I mean those who speak the common, “high,” imperial versions of those languages– and of the families and people, who since the Wende, live in these areas– but who would not be comfortable or welcome, at a bar or restaurant, who would not fit in because they cannot understand.
For that matter– in another thread here, when I quote Ramda in French, a man and a terrorist who tried to take my life, and whose victims I saw in the moments of that attentat, sounds reasonable. (Though I intentionally quoted what sounds life a confession and apologia, to my ears).
Berlin, tonight– remains a difficult experience for me. This is a day of celebration– and the world I am trying to briefly document above, is one that could not have come into existence, without the Wende. To hear the Slavic languages, — Arabic, Turkish, usw.– across this land, gives hope, and reason for pride.
But. But much of my family fled these lands, and it seems ironic, at best, unheimlich, dass ich wieder… that I come to Berlin at this moment, that I feel so comfortable in German, that I find Berlin, so welcoming. And.
And I am also here, simply to listen, to observe and witness. Wir sind ein volk… We are the (one)(a) people… wir sind das volk… we are the (only) people.” the quick and terrible progression after the Wende, to German exceptionalism, …
Perhaps, in such a celebration, Nationalism in its excesses cannot be avoided. But tonight, in the Netherlands, in Belgium, in France, for all their isolationalism and small-mindedness and inability to confront the world, I hear no such cries as in Berlin tonight, of “only Germany,” “German! German! German!” “Everything is German, we live and die in Germany, we live for Germany, and there is no other!”
Tomorrow, at least, will be another day, and we shall see, what comes.
JG says:
@David:
Have to alert the MAJOR goalpost shift here. Kirsten actually didn’t make a claim regarding overall criminality. She made a comment particular to rape. So how about you address the actual point.
rory says:
@JG: it was an even larger goalpost shift…Kirsten didn’t even claim (though it could be claimed) equity in number, just that they do happen in both types of communities. regardless, comment 6 at this point will live in ephblog infamy as the comment in which david finally laid it 100% bare for all to see.
David says:
We began with this question:
What is your answer, Rory? JG? You think it is, what, the ventilation system? The view? In another few years, your co-hort of Williams graduates will start having children and sending them to school. How many will send their children to places “like Richmond High?” Round numbers: zero. Is that EphBlog’s fault?
Kirsten then asked a reasonable question:
I gave an honest answer. The central fact that makes Richmond (and hundreds of other high schools across the country) unacceptable to Eph parents is, as best I can tell, the low IQ of its students and the pathology associated therewith.
But, maybe I am wrong. Why don’t you answer the question? There are hundreds (perhaps one thousand?) high schools in the US that have counted the child of a Williams graduate among their students in a decade or more. For some of these schools (e.g., a random place in Nowhere, North Dakota), this is just luck. Any Eph who lived in that town would be satisfied to send her child their. But, for most of these schools, the result is not random. Williams graduates move out of these school districts on purpose, or they pay extra money for the local private/Catholic alternative. Why do they do that?
At this point, you might list some alternatives. You might argue that the key thing that these schools have in common in small budgets. That less money leads to lower quality education and that Eph parents hate low quality.
But it is too easy for me to point to counter-examples, to show that Washington DC public schools spend more than $20,000 per student. There are a lot of Ephs who live in DC. How many of them send their children to a non-magnet, non-charter public high school in DC? I could be wrong, but my guess is zero. It is certainly zero for the bottom half of public high schools in DC, even though those schools get the same funding as the “good” schools.
If it is not spending that drives Williams parents away, what is it?
jeffz says:
David, the point is you’re missing the point. Why did you juxtapose this inquiry with a story about a horrific (and hardly representative) sex crime like this? We know enough to know how you operate by now, and this wasn’t exactly subtle in any event. Now of course, there is a correlation between drug, gun, gang and delinquency crimes and lower economic status, for a wide variety of reasons, not all of which relate to “IQ.” But that is besides the point. Columbine wasn’t a poor school. Glen Ridge, NJ was as rich as a public school can be. Horrific, aberrent actions in general, and something like a gang rape in particular, can happen anywhere. And sex crimes, especially adult sex crimes against children, are extremely prevalent among people just like yourself: rich, white, suburban males. I have seen nothing to suggest that rape, child molestation, child pornography, or other sex crimes are correlated with IQ or economic status.
jeffz says:
So I guess we can comfortably summarize your position, David, as if you want your kid to be gang raped, let them associate with poor, low-IQ peers. Is that about right? Good to know.
jeffz says:
And of course, correlation does not equal causation in any event. Besides, who has been responsible for more deaths of innocents in the history of humanity, high IQ or low IQ people? I think the answer on that one is easy … no one has ever claimed Hitler, Stalin, Osama Bin Ladin, etc. were STUPID. News flash: evil people can be smart too!!!
David says:
Jeff asks:
Because I was making the same point that Robert Gaudino started making 50 years ago. Williams students (and graduates) inhabit a radically restricted slice of society. A crime like this does not really touch Williams because none of our children attend schools like Richmond. If you think that this point is boring or obvious, then that is fine. But, every time I point it out, many folks seem upset.
(And, obviously, the only reason the topic came up at all is because Meg Bossong ‘05 was quoted in the article.)
But, in the spirit of constructive criticism, offer me advice. I cam across the quote from Meg. I decided to blog it. I could have just quoted her and said nothing. Assume, however, that I wanted to add a comment in Gaudino’s spirit, a comment which pointed out how far away the world of Richmond is from the world of Williams graduates. What should I have written?
Jr. Mom says:
I think Sam Sommers article is relevant here as well. And frankly, the rush to stereotyping and judgment on the “hazing” thread has me wondering if Sommers is using EB as a lab study.
*Fill in the blanks with the “pre-existing expectations” of your choice.
Aidan says:
there was a very interesting article in the Atlantic 2 years ago discussing the “no snitching” culture present in some urban commmunities. Apparently, in some urban environments, citizens do not report crimes to the police because they fear the police will not protect them against the gangs that will seek revenge for the “snitching.”
Jr. Mom says:
I saw an article yesterday linking the “snitching” issue with this crime. That, along with the “bystander effect” seems to have been a big part of why this horrific incident played out in the way that it did.
One of the more bizarre (and gruesome) aspects of it all, is how cell phones (photos and exchanges) are helping to provide all the incriminating evidence.
ephling says:
“no one has ever claimed Hitler, Stalin, Osama Bin Ladin, etc. were STUPID.”
Hitler was a high school dropout, Stalin was expelled from seminary, and there is debate as to whether Bin Ladin got a graduate degree. No real proof that they were not stupid. No question about the evil part.
Kirsten says:
Aidan, actually there were a few articles in the past few years in the Berkshire Eagle about the “no snitching” phenomenon in Pittsfield – that the police and DAs were having a terrible time getting anyone to talk to them about *anything*, and how difficult it made it to do their jobs.
David says:
Jeff writes:
Well, time to start opening your eyes. Help me out, Rory! The correlation between sex crimes (as well as other crimes) and poverty is one of the more robust facts in the social science. (Again, just talking about correlation here, not causation.) This (pdf) seems to provide a decent overview with lots of citations.
See the pdf for the associated footnotes.
One reason I bring up topics like this is because Williams graduates — even former prosecutors! — are often ill-informed about the facts.
Sam says:
First, Kane is not the heir of Gaudino. Gaudino confronted privileged Eph men with “uncomfortable” material truths, taking them to Appalachia and India to see first hand the ravages of poverty and prejudice. Kane is a Reagan-era conservative trying to defend The Bell Curve and its crude conceptualizations of intelligence. With his narrow understanding of culture and society, Kane would make Williams ever more exclusive. Gaudino worked against that impulse.
Second, as someone who actually teaches current Williams students, I can say that, yes, some of them have gone to “schools like Richmond High School.” Regardless of Kane’s effort to belittle everything to do with diversity at Williams, there have, over my twenty years here, always been students who work hard despite very difficult family and economic circumstances. They have been exposed to crime; they are not sheltered. Indeed, negotiating their lives at Williams and their lives at home can be quite challenging at times. No, I do not have aggregate data. Yes, I have talked and advised students who have come from “schools like Richmond High School.” We should recognize and support those students, not dismiss them out of hand as Kane does.
rory says:
Gaudino would have tact. Gaudino never would have written or said comment six.
I (did not) know Robert Gaudino. You, sir, are no Robert Gaudino.
what you wrote in comment six is not “uncomfortable learning” it was, quite simply a way to distance yourself from these acts. As a rich williams grad, you’re implying that horrific gang rapes do not happen to me*, nor are they at all because of me*, or even happen around me* because I do not have the “pathologies” of low IQ. My social group is shrunk because it is safer/better for me to keep it to only high IQ types, else i have to interact with those “pathologies” and that’s a dangerous/stupid thing to do, so I won’t. It is, perhaps the single most comforting thing ever written if one does not push deeper into the question.
why are you free from interacting with those with “pathologies”? How can you be sure they are “pathologies”? What role does the ideology of “low-IQ = crime” play in structuring our society? How much does racial/economic segregation affect people having those views? How much are these “pathologies” affected by things that aren’t genetic…such as california’s inept system of school funding, the position of cops/authorities in cities/towns such as Richmond, the changing ethnic and racial composition of the town, etc? You want to make it uncomfortable for williams people? Find a way to distribute
Comment six raises NONE of those points, offers “discomfort” to many of us, but no learning. Do not besmirch Gaudino’s name.
*or others like me.
Ronit says:
@jeffz: Somehow, I was not expecting this to be Godwined. Nicely done.
rory says:
we cross posted. “help me out rory”? here’s your piece of advice: don’t ever again extrapolate from one horrific incident to make a point about IQ, race, poverty, or pathology again. Don’t ever make a comment like comment #6 again. Don’t ever have to find evidence after the fact when making a claim. Don’t ever change the goalposts again like you have in this post. And don’t recruit me to save your ass when you do.
You know where social psychologists first discovered the bystander effect? A middle-income* white neighborhood in NYC. No snitching probably played a role in this case but not that first case. No snitching is a complex cultural adaptation to the semi-militarized police force that began to patrol urban and/or non-white areas in the 1980s and 1990s. For more information of the complex interactions between police and urban black males (for example), see Alice Goffman’s piece in American Sociological Review from this summer.
*i believe. Kew Gardens in the 1960s was a white part of Queens and not low-income. That I know.
David says:
Rory: Jeff asserts incorrectly that there is zero correlation between sex crimes and socio-economic status. Please educate him by confirming that there is a positive correlation.
rory says:
@David: David, I don’t care about your goalpost move*. don’t tell me what to do. that’s a beef between you and him and i’m not taking your side on anything here until you apologize for comment 6.
*especially when you find the one potentially mistaken small point in an otherwise clear and correct point and focus on it instead of the larger picture. which you do on almost every goalpost move.
Jr. Mom says:
@rory:
Thanks for the background on the bystander effect and no snitching. Good to know.
Ronit says:
@rory: I don’t have any particular dog in this fight, but did social psychologists really “discover” the bystander effect in the Kitty Genovese case? Isn’t there some recent research showing that the basic facts of the case were exaggerated (there weren’t that many eyewitnesses, the police was called at least once…), and the story was turned into a parable quite quickly by the media?
It’s also interesting to me that the Kitty Genovese case was frequently cited as a parable for the nature of “New Yorkers” or “urban Americans” or “people like that”, in exactly the same unhelpful way David is speaking about “schools like Richmond”.
rory says:
@Ronit: Yes, you are correct and my wording wasn’t clear (apologies). The Kitty Genovese case–and the questionable reporting on it–inspired the research that discovered the “bystander effect”. It has been found in lab experiments since and is a kinda classic prisoners dilemma type of situation…in that if i know there are others who could do something and i don’t want to get involved, the more people there are, the less likely i am to get involved. there are, of course, many other reasons why people don’t call.
excellent point about the false and useless parable lessons of the Genovese story at that time.
In the Richmond case, it appears that a teenager not in the immediate crowd tipped the police towards the assault once s/he found out. Like Genovese, the actual truth is not as first presented by the media.
Aidan says:
op cit: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200704/stop-snitching
Its pretty terrifying when citizens can’t approach the police to help solve/stop crimes because they’re afraid for their lives.
Ronit says:
@Aidan: Thanks for the link. Your comment also connects to the illegal immigration issue. How likely are illegal immigrants to report a crime they observe if they are in fear of deportation?
This may or may not be relevant to what happened at Richmond. I have no idea.
Aidan says:
this article in the NYT says it is exactly relevant: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/us/08sfrichmond.html
…
Summerlynn Sigler, an English teacher, said there were some boys planning to beat up the victim once she returned to school, on the grounds that she was to blame if her attackers received life sentences.
Daisy Santoya, a ninth grader, said schoolmates had accused her of snitching and told her to watch her back after she went to the police with information.
And some exasperated students said they could not understand why this particular rape was such a big deal. “What happened was bad,” said Abraham Tejeda, a sophomore. “I’m not going to lie, but she shouldn’t have put herself in that situation.”
Fear may also play a role in the reactions. Lizeth Franco, the daughter of the principal and a senior at Richmond High, said she believed that many people were intimidated by the “no snitching” ethos. “People didn’t speak up because they were afraid,” Lizeth said, “not because they’re animals and savages.”
wslack says:
@ephling: I’m pretty sure we can find one Nazi who had a real education; reading does necessarily a good person make.
@Ronit: Immigrant crime non-reporting is a continual issue, and it has allowed for their exploitation. Granted, they have chosen to risk that by coming here illegally, but….
kthomas says:
@wslack, ephling: Albert Speer as the “gentleman Nazi” aside, one of the aspects of coming to terms with the rise of the National Socialist Party is dealing with its members being “the height of culture.” (While close to factually correct, I think the characterization of Hitler is probably about as fair as pointing out that Bill Gates is a Harvard drop-out; note that Gymnasium is not really equivalent to US high school.(1)
@(1)/JeffZ: It’s equally worth noting, quickly, that the international comparisons of US acheivement are usually apples to oranges. Many of the western european systems track people out of academic/professional preparation by the equivalent of 5th-8th grades; thus, we’re often comparing 100% of the US population, to the academic top 40-60% of other nations.