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”?
IN YOUR POST RESPOND TO SOMEONE ELSE'S POST. 4-6 SENTENCES - DUE WEDNESDAY 7:30AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
28 comments:
I think Cash's actions should have been governed by a moral sense of right versus wrong, rather than by his lack of obligation under the law. There may be different obligations under the laws for different states, but I think that the moral obligation to help others stays the same. However, the moral obligation may depend on the type of wrong. I think the moral obligation to intervene is greater if the "wrong" involves injury to a person rather than property. For example, if Cash was looking over the stall and they were writing graffiti on the inside of the stall, then yes he should do something, but not to the same severity as what he should have done when he looked over the stall and saw that Jeremy was about to harm the little girl.
I believe that as far as a legal sense its clear that with the current law, Cash had no obligations at all. In a moral sense thought this is an open and shut case. I don't care what type of piss-poor excuse that Cash could fathom up, the fact of the matter is that what he did was wrong and he knows it. Never mind the fact his best friend murdered this little girl, but he confessed it to Cash and they continued to party. No-matter what way you look at that, this just goes to show how morally weak that Cash is. I must admit that this is a very severe case of civilian obligation, and upon further review I have come to the conclusion that if this had been a minor infraction then maybe Cash would make a little sense in his defense. Its safe to say that civilian accountability depends on the crime. In addition, if the crime committed is potentially life threatening then you as a person should at least inform somebody else that could help. As for the asinine statement that Cash made about how he didn't want to get involved with anyone else's problems, i felt that his statement was very disrespectful to the family. This poor little girl was brutally raped and killed and the only thing that this idiot could think of was "not going to lose sleep over someone else’s problems". Like I have previously stated Cash's morals are extremely low, in fact its almost safe to safe morals like his are for the lowest of the low ,and the scum of the earth. I also didn't appreciate the comment about how he was apparently scared that he would get into trouble, and that was also factored into his reasoning for not doing anything. (A real man would have done something instead of making excuses as to way he shouldn't to be blamed to having a part in this murder.) When people make comments like these you cant even respect them. I could understand if his befriend held him at gunpoint or something, but that was nowhere near the case. Cash is a coward, as a man I couldn't even respect him. Standing around and giving someone a look doesn't do anything at all, and I was personally sickened when I heard that this was all that Cash attempted to do. My words to Cash would be to put himself in that situation. What if he had a daughter and she was being assaulted, and then murdered. Would Cash like it if the bystanders stood around and merely did nothing? I believe that even if it may inconvenience you for maybe just a second, if its to potentially save a human life it is truly worth the time.
I agree what STAT is saying in his/her blog. I am also trying to figure out if Cash really thought this out. Maybe this stuff he said to the people came out of his mouth too quick or something. I mean why would you, a 18, 19 year old guy stand over a stall and give your friend a "LOOK"? For crying out loud man, this guy is nuts, whacko, however you spell the thing. Put your self in his shoes people and let me know what you would do in this situation. Honestly, if it was my sister or if it was just a stranger and I had no clue who this little girl was. I would beat the heck out this guy. "I gave him a look", man get out of here with that mess!!
I agree with Stat on his blog to some extent. When Cash decided to walk outside and not try and verbally stop his friend, I believe that is wrong but under the legal system he can not be charge. Cash was indeed looking out for him self and i do not see why people are freaking out about that. I would indeed tell authorities once Jeremy or my best friend would admit to murdering a human, but i also can see why David did not go back into the bathroom. STAT said Jeremy would harm this little girl we can not assume that because he was indeed playing with her minutes before. I do disagree on the dad's choice to bring his little girl into a cassino at 3 in the morning
I agree with STAT to some extent...I feel that the law should have had Cash responsible on some level. He knew that there was a murder and yet did not inform the police. That should be an accomplice/tampering with police evidence; due to the fact that he did NOT confess to the killing of his friend. Morality does have a lot to do with the fact that he should have gotten in some sort of trouble with the law, but he didn't tell the legal system of a murder he was WELL aware of. There needs to be something done about this.
I think this Cash dude is a tragic excuse for a man. Reguardless if the offender is your friend or not, that was unacceptable for him just to tap his friend on the head. Im so shocked that him being in trouble is more important than saving a little girls life. That is so crazy to me. He is a selfish bum and even though there is no law holding him accountable, he should know in his heart that he was wrong.
What happened on the night at the casino is a terrible event and will never be forgotten; we ALL agree on that. But we don't all share the same opinion of David Cash. Before even saying anything, we must look at every little thing that Cash chose to do and whether or not we agree or disagree. You have to realize that this is 3 in the morning at a casino where a little girl shouldn't be in the first place especially without her father (who should be charged for endagerment and I'm not sure why no one has seen that yet). Strohmeyer followed Sherrice in the bathroom and Cash followed his best friend not knowing what to expect. That first thing is something we all would have done (following your best friend). Next, Cash sees what he does and decides to tap his friend on the head in an effort to make him realize whats happening. This is what I dont exactly agree upon. Taping on the head is not enough effort. Even not knowing what it could lead to, I would probably do much more to try to get my friend out of the bathroom. But, as Cash said he had no idea that it would lead to murder. Cash then chose to leave the bathroom out of fear for his own self being. This is something I would have done as well if I could not get my friend out of there, remember that I would have tried harder to get my friend out first though. The reason Cash left could be considered selfish but we ALL know that we are ALL selfish in our own ways. The facts are straight, Cash did not know what was going to happen and you can't just assume things, even if they are good or bad. You wouldn't want to be in his situation, be caught along with his friend and be charged with accessory to murder, EVEN THOUGH YOU DIDN'T TAKE ANY ACTION IN IT. After Strohmeyer admitted to his friend that he murdered the girl, Cash did nothing...I dont really agree with that, as I probably would have done something whether it be just to get my friend to turn himself in or turning my friend in myself. What happens after all of that we have no control over. Cash is looked at from many different perspectives. But, the law is clear, and there is no "Good Samaritan" Law so Cash can't be legally or morally charged with anything having to do with murder. Cash is not a murderer, but yes if he had tried harder maybe the situation would be different today. I feel that people should look at the facts and put themselves in his shoes and realize that they are not as different as they think they are. 3:00 A.M. in a casino, not completely realizing whats going on and being hit with the most shocking news of your life by your best friend. What would you do?
I agree on everything that "Forrest" has said in their blog. There is no criminal charge for Cash's situation because our legal system can't hold barriers on the moralities of humans, and yes he is watching out for himself. You can not just assume bad things will always happen. If we did then everyone would be afraid to do almost anything. "Forrest" thank you for seeing it this way as well.
A very important thing that has been mentioned a couple times already is that Cash really was not in harms way. It was his friend that was doing this. It was not like it was someone who posed an immediate danger to himself. You can tell that Cash is just trying to defend his "in-action." Take it a step further, even if this was someone Cash didn't know, how difficult would it have been to go grab a security guard to tell him or her to go look in the bathroom? In reality, you would have helped your friend more. Then, instead of life in prison for murder, maybe it would have been 20 years for assault.
I have two questions: First, are there people in your own life that you would protect to this degree? Would you protect those closest to you if they murdered someone in cold blood like this? I consider murder and self-defense completely different, so keep that in mind. For me, I would turn in my own parents if they went out of their way to murder someone. So I don't think there is anyone so important that I would protect at all costs.
Second, is there anyone here who would put their own safety in jeopardy to save a 7 year old girl? Would you be willing to take one or two punches to give the girl time to run away? A few of us have mentioned conscience already, and I just think that it would weigh on my conscience forever if I walked away without even putting up a fight, even though I didn't know this girl. A human life is a human life, even if that person is a stranger to me.
I believe Cash's actions should have been governed by right and wrong. If he would not have been scared and ran away from the crime then he would have been able to stop it. I do not care what his excuse is, this dude (Cash) is a weak, weird guy who can not even admit to his actions being wrong. Its one thing to actually mess up and let someone die, but when you do not admit that you were wrong and could have done something, thats even worse. Cash thinks even to this day that he was right in what he did, and in the video someone asked him if he thought about forgiving the mother and he said its a good idea. The student questioning him answered in a very sarcastic tone "yea after a year and half it sounds like a good idea". This all goes to show that Cash is a retard, he should at least admit to his stupidity and ADMIT he was wrong. However, he still holds adamant about his beliefs of this situation which is, you see a crime, you get scared (self preservation), and you run away from something that can be easily prevented. This dude needs some serious counseling, and should put his precious education on hold. If something bad was happening to me or my family members or friends and they had to rely on a guys like Cash, then this world would be a very sad place.
If a person witnesses something wrong, then that person has three options. One, try and stop the crime by personally interfering. Two, run away and call the cops or inform authorities or people about the crime. ( You MUST do this at least) Last option: run away and act like nothing happened. (This is stupidity and foolishness and should never be done.) However if the nature of the wrong is very small, like someone stealing anothers pencil then you do not necessarily have to jump up and tell the whole world about it. This being said, when someones life is in danger, or some type of higher degree crime is about to happen or is happening, then a witness has to do something.
All in all, Cash should have opened the stall door, and beaten his friend, or at least seperate the two of them. Instead Cash ran away like a little baby and did not tell anyone about the crime, and even partied after his friend admitted to it. Cash is a loser, people who are saying Cash might have been right to run away should reconsider their ideologies cause this dum ... shouldnt be defended.
I agree with LeVelle the comments he made about "giving him a look". As LeVelle stated, a 18-20 year old guy should be strong enough mentally and physically to stop a crime either by interfering or getting help. This Cash dude most likely hit his head when he was a child or his mother dropped him or something cause he is "Whacko".
Basically if Cash's best friend came into his house and shot down his mother, Cash would give him "the LOOK" and mabye a tap on the head and everything would be okay. No thats a sick joke, everything would NOT be okay, and its the same thing here. What Cash did is not okay, and is not acceptable.
I agree with what STAT and nismo24 said. Yes, he wasn't "legally obligated" to do something to protect this little girl but he definitely should have. Everyone is selfish to some degree, but to be selfish enough not to protect a 7 year old girl is ridiculous. In regards to what Shad said, yes her father shouldn't have let her be out that late but that is not what this is about, this is about Cash's decision not to do anything. There were countless times when he could have stopped his friend from doing something; but he didn't. When an 18 year old boy walks into the GIRLS restroom after a 7 year old you know that's not right. Cash could have stopped him then. When an 18 year old is throwing paper towels at a 7 year old girl in the girls bathroom that is not right. Cash could have stopped him then. When an 18 year old boy goes into the same stall as a 7 year old girl that is not right. Cash could have stopped him then. When Cash was watching everything Strohmeyer was doing in the stall he could have stopped him then. All he did was tap him on the head and give him a look. You give someone a look when they're talking during a movie that you want to watch; not when someone is doing what Strohmeyer was doing. Then Cash just left. He left an 18 year old in a stall with a 7 year old girl. Cash admitted that he was scared; how do you think that little girl felt? And then Cash didn't even do anything when Strohmeyer admitted to killing her. He could have told a police officer; but he didn't. In regards to Shads comment, it made me mad just reading what you had to say. You honestly would leave when that is going on? That is beyond selfish. Even if someone goes into the bathroom they would see that he is trying to stop his friend. You would not get into trouble for that. If you want me to put myself in his shoes I would feel like the biggest peice of sh*t in the world because I could have stopped someone from murdering an innocent 7 year old girl. Imagine if you had a daughter (or more realistically a little sister or brother) and someone was watching that happen to them and didnt step in and now they are dead. How would you feel? Cash had a moral obligation to step in and do something, but he obviously has no morals at all and it disgusts me. He needs to be in jail or a mental institution.
I believe that David Cash should be semi-accountable for this murder morally, but not accountable legally. The bystander's obligations depend on the crime. I think there are different rules depending on the nature of the "wrong." As STAT stated, there is a lower obligation for a less severe crime. I believe that all states DO have the same law regarding bystanders to crimes, but I could be wrong. I think a law could be inserted to hold bystanders accountable. It would be complicated but certainly possible. Whether or not we want such a law is the question. If bystanders always did what they felt was best for the overall good, we wouldn't need a law. It is unfortunate that these crimes even occur in the first place. If you are going to consider holding the bystander semi-accountable, then maybe you should consider holding the father mildly accountable, for bringing his daughter to a casino and leaving her unattended at 3 a.m.
And one more thing, the Browns need to sign Ladanian Tomlinson or Westbrook and the Indians need to sign Pedro Martinez!
I agree with 20orange10 to the fullest extent. You are right on point with what you were saying about CASH having ample time to stop his friend. It didn’t have to take him being in a bathroom stall for him to realize this is not right. But something else is not right, CASH. He is a loony freak who to me has no heart at all. How can you stand by and let a innocent little girl suffer like that because you are trying to protect your friend? Never could a friend be that important that I would stand by and let that happen. Wow that just blow my mind, I swear it does. I am also disgusted to read Shads comment. Yea he father shouldn’t have had her in a casino at 3 am but that does not make it his fault that this happened to his sweet little girl. I don’t fully understand what you mean by “he didn’t know what was going to happened, he cannot assume that she was going to be murdered". Your right he cannot assume that he was going to murder her, but if you had any common since you would know that at a minimum she was going to be raped. So you would sit back and let that happen because you are scared? That’s some bull. All I got to say about how you view things is that people don’t understand things until it has happened to them, other wise they say things like " he didn’t know". Well I bet if that were you, you would be pissed off if someone said “he didn’t know, he’s not liable". So until something like that hits home for you, you will always have that ignorant out look on the situation.
I think cash was in a way right to walk away from that bad situation, with the intention of not knowing his friend was going to do anything that dramatic and harmfull. That being said, if your best friend was in that situation or you saw that happening.. what would you do? He probably never expected his friend to ever commit any crime, but he should have never aloud his friend to even walk into that bathroom let alone touch the young girl. Maybe walking away was a good idea at first not knowing what was going on in reality, but then after his friend told him right away what actually happened, in my opinion, he should have immediately gone to the police. It is one thing to walk away from a situation you want nothing to do with, but to hear that murder was commited and not do anything about it (and continue with the night) is definetly wrong and not ok. It is not wrong, in my opinion, to walk away from anything you are not comfortable with, but after knowing the circumstances, something should have been done right away.
I agree with nismo24, that he appeared to have no moral obligation after the incident. But he should be punished for not telling right away, rather than walking away from the situation. Also, with newyork123, he should have been held responsible somewhat, in some way.. because he could have made a bigger difference, or even have shown more remorse.
I strongly disagree with what "Shad" said about how CASH followed his best friend into a girls bathroom at 3 in the morning...and didn't know to expect. The whole statement alone sounds fishy all the way around. First NEITHER of those dummies should have been in a GIRLS bathroom at three o' clock in the morning. Yes i do understand that this little girl should not have been left unattended, but that gives them no right to follow this girl. Also i STRONGLY disagree with what "Shad said about how Cash didn't want to possibly become an accessory to murder. OK, now lets think about that for just a second.....hhmmmm...done. If Cash would have intervened in the first place ,and attempted to try and stop the girl from being assaulted. Maybe she would still be alive. Logically speaking he would have a greater chance of being charged with something other than "Coward of the Year", since his buddy told him that he killed the girl and Cash informed no one.
Thank you "patrick" i can understand where you are coming from compleatly. If Cash didnt know what would possibly happen, walking away is aceptable. But, for that same matter when Cash entered the bathroom stall, his friend had that girl restrained with his hand over her mouth. Also from Cash's' report she was also trying to scream. With all of this going on don't you think it may be implied that something is going terribly wrong here?? Even if he didn't kill her, is it not a crime to restrain a little girl against her will with her kicking and screaming??
Personally I definitely think that Cash should have actually done something. I mean you watch your friend follow a little girl into the bathroom at 3 in the morning, then watch them play with eachother, then watch him cover her mouth, hear her scream, and then hear him threaten her. I mean come on now something doesn't seem right. Its easier to say what he could have done but he was in a totally different situation than what everyone else was in. I think that he could have made a difference and none of that should have happen but since it did I think he should be charged with something at least
I agree with LeVelle when he was talking about giving his friend a "look." Okay people have looks but in that type of situation you don't give someone a "look." you pull him off of that little girl and get yourself and him the heck out of there and nothing else happens.
The actions of the young man Cash can and will be seen as irresponsible. He stood as a bystander when a innocent little girl was murdered. He will always be associated with his actions to just walk away and turn his shoulder. What people dont realize is that his interfering could have resulted in a very bad personal situation for himself. He could have been murdered by his friend one of his buddies, endless possibilities are possible.
in response to what nismo24 said I think that Cash should be held responsible for this girls life for doing nothing. The fact that he was too scared to take an action shows that he was having other thoughts about what might happened if he does help. This caused him to not react and just go on with his business.
I think that what Cash made a wrong decision when leaving his friend in the bathroom with a little girl. However I do understand his hesitation on reporting to the police. It was his bestfriend and its hard to tell on someone that you are really close to. Also his apology could have been better he may not be able to feel bad as much as other people about but he should have been more respectful with words I think. Me personally would have pulled my friend off of the little girl because that would of saved my bestfriend life in prison along with the life of the little girl.
I also agree with Shad and Forrest you cannot force somebody to have good morals. Let alone a whole nation to have the same morals its just not gonna happen. I would also like to bring up the irresponsible father who brought an 8 year old girl to a casino at 3 in the morning unattend. Never would I bring my child to a casino where people who drink and some illegal activity may be going on the father should be responsible as well but just not to the same extent as Cash's bestfriend.
I think the Bad Samaritan was just a horrible thing. In the first place I thought the kids must have been completely messed up in their heads. I also think they had a secrete plan to begin with or else two 18 year old boys wouldn’t just be walking into a ladies bathroom in public. I thought that once they both went in the one friend who didn’t commit the crime chickened out on whatever their plan was. They would not just go in the girl’s bathroom to use the bathroom because they said they were both in stalls and the one friend looked over and saw the other boy with the little girl. Whatever the boy said who didn’t commit the crime I think he is lying about EVERYTHING and he just didn’t follow through with their original plan. It's just all wrong to me and makes no sense. On the other hand I think that it was okay for the friend to leave the bathroom if like he said didn't see his friend rapping the little girl just yet. I think he must have said something to him if their "was not" a plan at all and I would bet the bad guy said something like just get out. And the friend who left prob. thought to himself I really don’t want to get in any trouble or get hurt and just get out of here asap. I thought that was okay but I think he should have turned his friend in right away or like I said there may have been a plan because it's weird that they went into the ladies bathroom in the first place which would stop his friend from turning him in before anyone could find out.
I also agree with what Tom Tom said because I do feel he will always be known as a bystander for leaving the crime without saying anything. But I also agree with him when he said he left the crime and didn't say anything in the case that one of his buddies could have hurt him by turning his friend in. I believe it was okay for him to feel that way even though it was bad. Because now of days there are sooo many people out for themselves. I also think he might have frozen up and didn't know what to do at that exact moment. He could have been in shock and maybe that could have held him back from making a confession.
I think that whatever everyone else' s excuses are the wrong thing is always wrong. You can't ease out of your pain or suffering. If you choose to do what you know is wrong then you have to deal with it yourself and only blame you and only you. I know that the law states that you can be a bystander by even witnessing the situation and watching it, but to stand up for what you know whatis wrong whats the harm in that? Cash knew what was going on and he knew what he should have done, and he didn't. There are many rules depending on the nature of the meaning "wrong", but isn't that the whole point of "wrong" in this world. Isn't the word "wrong" supposed to be a learning word. To learn right from wrong, good or bad, etc and teach everyone what to do and what not to do. I know that Cash made his decision and that was to be a bystander and that is none of our business why he chose to choose this, but to rescue is to be brave and to resist is to be ashamed or afraid, and that to myself is an awful way to be. If I was in that situation I really do not know what I would do, but I know I would do all I can to be a rescuer never a resister because we owe our world more than that after all we have been through individually.
I agree with the beginning of nismo24's statement. That for a legal sense Cash had no obligations, but in a moral sense it seems it's the persons decision is what I think nismo24 is trying to say. Which is true the law is the law and everyone should abide by the law, but when you are able to make your own decisions it is morally ethical to do the right thing at the right time if you can. I do disagree however, when nismo24 stated that Cash is a coward, as a man I couldn't even respect him. I think that for not feeling what Cash may have been feeling nismo24 as no right to say that. I understand completely why nismo24 said that but you can't judge someone from making a mistake based on not knowing what they are going through in that exact moment. I am as well sickened by this horrific story, but you can't just judge people from making 1. there own decisions and 2. judging someone for making mistakes because truthfully WE ALL make mistakes. However you want to put the pieces of the puzzle together we all do and we all know it.
Post a Comment