Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder - Research Paper Example

? Thirty-Eight Saw Murder Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Introduction In New York, many crimes are reported every day. These crimes range from petty crime to very serious crimes. The seriousness of some crimes depends on how they are carried out. This means that the magnitude of some of them depends on what the offender did, and how they did it. The law enforcement agencies protect people of whichever part of the country they represent. However, what happens when the same people supposed to be protected do not seem to understand the purpose of a law enforcement agency? Sometimes, it is very rare to find a law enforcement agency being associated with positive things (Neild, 2001). The problem with this is the assumption they cannot carry out their jobs effectively. This means that whenever a problem arises they might be the last persons to know about it. Also, trying to deal with people who care less about others is another problem. The murder of a woman in the year 1964 is such a case. It happened in New York. The woman was stalked and stabbed to death. She might have considered them her neighbours, but when she needed them, they could do nothing to help her. This paper will review the crime, and the justice system which the accused should have faced. Description of the Crime Being a manager at a bar, Miss Genovese Katherine, known as Kitty to her neighbours, was heading home at the time of the incident. She had just gotten into the neighbourhood at around half past three in the morning. When she had parked her car and was about to get to her apartment, she noticed a man by the far end of the parking lot. She decided to head to a call box. This is where the number to the 102nd precinct could be found. However, before she could reach the call box, the man had gotten to her, grabbed her and stabbed her (Gansberg, 1964). She screamed for help. At that time, a man opened a window and shouted at the man. The man without any fear looked up, shrugged, and decided to walk away slowly. As the lights went out, the killer went back to Kitty, who was now struggling to get back to her feet. She wanted to get to the other side of the building. However, before she could do this, her assailant got to her, and stabbed her again. As she shrieked the second time, many more lights came on. When the assailant saw this, he got in his vehicle and drove away. At the same time as Kitty was trying to back on her feet, a city bus passed by (Gansberg, 1964). By that time, it was thirty five minutes past three o’clock. Nobody, however, bothered to come and check on Kitty after the second attempt on her life. This is where the attacker came again. By that time, she had managed to crawl to the back of a freshly painted building. She had hoped that it would offer some protection. This was not to be. The attacker tried the first door, but she was not there. He found her strewn on the floor at the second one, and stabbed her again. This time, it was fatal. The police arrived at the scene in two minutes after receiving a call from a man who claimed to be Kitty’s neighbour (Gansberg, 1964). That was about ten minutes to four o’clock. Immediately an ambulance took off with her corpse the neighbours came out of their houses. As they were re-constructing the crime scene, they asked them why nobody called the police. One man said that he heard everything but was too tired to do anything. He said that he went back to bed. Another woman anxiously said that she did not want her husband to get involved. What was shocking about it was that the person who had called the police did it after seeking advice form a friend in another area. Then afterwards, he had to cross the roof to another apartment to have an elderly woman to make the call. Upon further inquiry, he sheepishly said that he did not want to get involved (Gansberg, 1964). The department said that at least thirty eight people witnessed this crime. However, not one could prevent the death of Miss Genovese. Process in the Criminal Justice System Upon arrest, which was six days after the murder had taken place, the police discovered that the killer had killed two more people. The other victims were 24 and 15 years. These victims were Annie May Johnson and Barbara Kralik. In the Barbara case, the police were holding someone else who had confessed to the murder of the 15 year old (Gansberg, 1964). In the criminal justice system, a process of decision making exists. This is to judge the fate of the accused. During this process, the procedure has to be followed to ensure that justice is being served. In the above case, the accused before arrest would be investigated. This ensures that there is proof of the said crime. The motive for carrying it out must be established (Neild, 2001). There might have been facts that indicated that a crime had taken place that further led to the arrest of the accused. The purpose of arrest would be to hold the suspect in custody until the time he is scheduled to go to court. Arrest is made if there is a sure claim made that a crime can be linked to the person arrested. This is known as the probable cause for arrest. Prosecution follows the arrest. This is where the district attorney gets to weigh the seriousness of the matter at hand (Neild, 2001). The offense carried out is looked at. The accused will either be charged with the crime, or not. To determine this, the evidence against him will be brought forward. The strength of the evidence levelled against him will determine if he will be indicted. That is the next phase that will follow in the determining of charges against him. Indictment is where the prosecutor will present charges to a grand jury where there is a deliberation as to whether the accused is guilty or not (Neild, 2001). At the jury, in some states, the prosecutor is the only person that presents the case against the accused. He will not have the chance to an attorney or a defense. An indictment is possible in this case since it is a capital crime. He will later be arraigned in court. This is where he will enter a plea bargain. There are two most common pleas; these are, guilty and not guilty. The period that follows is where he will be held in detention, or let go on bail (Neild, 2001). This is depending on the gravity of the case. His case does not warrant any release since he is a threat to himself, and others, as well. Afterwards, he will stand trial. This is in front of a judge or a jury. Conviction of guilt is only held if they prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they can connect the accused to the crime. At sentencing, the judge will find a suitable sentence for the accused. This sentencing would probably be incarceration in a maximum prison facility. This is due to the intense nature of the crime he had committed. Such crimes warrant such sentences. They serve as a lesson to others who might want to cause harm to others, or even murder (Neild, 2001). In light of this sentence, the accused could expect life imprisonment, or even face the death penalty. He can also expect parole if he completes of his sentence as indicated by law. He can also hope for release if he gets a pardon by the state. Another probable alternative to the said sentence would be institutionalization. This is where the accused will be placed under observation to prove if he is sane. If he is not, he will be placed under the mental institution to be cared for. This is to ensure that he is not a danger to his immediate environment (Neild, 2001). Under this supervision, the system may be doing him some justice. He may get the help he needs to prevent further occurrence of such cases. The weakest link could be the possible acceptance of finding the accused mentally unstable. There might be professional people who can find out if someone is of sound mind. However, they may not be 100% sure about the conclusion they might come up with. Some people can have the capability of fooling the system. It is for this reason that the weakest link be dealt with before every other criminal finds a loophole in it (Shaw & Rhomberg, 2003). The strongest link in the system would be the fact that they did not let the accused out on bail. This was because he might have been a threat to his immediate environment. It is for this reason that they cannot find an alternative to have the accused out on the streets again. This strong link in the justice system should be made stronger so as to enable victims of heinous crimes to get the justice they need (Shaw & Rhomberg, 2003). In conclusion, the importance placed on crime by law enforcement agencies should be emphasised. This is by creating awareness around the states they are in to help their work easier. The deaths of many innocent people will be prevented this way. It may also help keep criminals off the streets, and in where they belong, prison. With a single phone call, the above crime and many others might have been avoided. It is time for people to stand up and fight for their safety (Shaw & Rhomberg, 2003). References Gansberg, M. (1964). Thirty-Eight who saw murder did not call the police. New York: Free Press. Neild, R. (2001). Democratic police reforms in war-torn states. Journal of Conflict, Security and Development, 1(1), 45-67. Shaw, M., Dijk, J., & Rhomberg, W. (2003). Determining trends in global crime and justice: An overview of results from the United Nations surveys of crime trends and operations of criminal justice systems. Forum on Crime and Society, 3(1 & 2), 35-62. Retrieved from http://www.unodc.org/pdf/crime/forum/forum3_Art2.pdf Read More