Reason First: Buddy Jacobson’s Murderous Ways
How can morality prevent murder?
On the evening of Sunday August 6, 1978, 47-year-old Howard “Buddy” Jacobson brutally carved into Jack Tupper’s face, caved in his head, and shot him eight times. A family by the name of the Carattinis discovered the unrecognizable face of Tupper in a burning wooden crate in a vacant lot.
Jealousy sparked the entire ugly turn of events.
Jacobson dated a model girlfriend named Melanie Cain. Disenchanted with her much older lover, Cain decided to let her eye stray. Across the hall on East 84th Street from Jacobson and Cain, Jack Tupper moved into his own apartment. Quickly, Tupper and Cain struck up an illegitimate romance.
Sensing that the air had become too toxic for the pair to continue with Tupper around, Jacobson and Cain moved into the Drake Hotel in New York. Cain signed the lease while Jacobson carried out evil on East 84th Street. Jacobson saw a minimum of twenty-five years behind bars for second-degree murder after he escaped his first sentencing hearing. He would then die of bone cancer nearly eleven years after he killed Tupper.
How could all of this been avoided? Honesty. Integrity. Justice. By Cain coming clean about her affair with Tupper, then there could have been two rational options for Jacobson to make. One: he could’ve said to hell with you, woman, and packed his stuff and left. Option two would have allowed for the tryst to continue with his approval.
The ugliness of the case and the viciousness of the crime itself showed a man of little to no self-esteem. Jacobson couldn’t handle the fact that his beautiful young woman had designs to be with another man.
If Jacobson had any sense of integrity, he would have taken seriously her plans to be with another man. And if she had a speck of a spine, she would’ve just calmly notified Jacobson of her dealings.
Justice would have arisen if Jacobson and Tupper had sat down and discussed terms for spending time with Cane. Jacobson, of course, committed a heinous crime but all three were guilty of not acting morally.
The morality of the case hinged upon Tupper being upfront, Cain telling the truth, and Jacobson weighing his options with murder out of the picture.
In this series of disastrous events, Jacobson of course deserved twenty-five years behind the wall. The fact that he only served a fraction of his sentence was just a further injustice against Tupper’s memory.
Ethics should have entered the equation. With the right virtues and values in place, the trio may have had a better chance at living the good life. Jacobson, Tupper, and Cain each had the means to guide their lives in whatever productive way they wished. At the bloody center of it all was of course, Jacobson.
His monstrous actions came about because of his own frailty and inability to deal with the facts and truth. Instead of murdering Tupper, all that he had to do was allow the man to persuade him to occasionally spend conjugal time with Cain.
What will never be known is if Jacobson had just talked with Tupper rather than bashing in his head. His irrationality permeated his mind and all he could think of was destroying. This approach to the problems one faces plagued Jacobson and distorted his view of reality. He hung onto feelings and emotions as primaries rather than proper, rational thought. He will forever be remembered for his refusal to think.
Had reason been a bedrock in Jacobson’s mind, then none of this would have been. It is the moment in the mind which tells the individual to act as a man or a brute. It’s too bad that Jacobson chose the latter.