Criminal logo

The Bad Samaritan

Courtney K.

By Courtney KellerPublished 4 years ago 4 min read
Like

Courtney A. Keller

CJUS 3025/2020-Spring 2

Assignment #4-2

Chapter 4/Page 45

4-2 The Bad Samaritan

Summary of the incident: David Cash and Jeremy Strohmeyer, both 18 years old, went to a casino that is located on the border of California and Nevada. After they entered the casino, Jeremy Strohmeyer walked into a women’s restroom at the casino. Upon entrance, Mr. Strohmeyer forced himself on to a seven-year girl. Soon after Mr. Strohmeyer started his offense, David Cash walked into the bathroom and witnessed this altercation.

After one failed attempt to stop this altercation, David Cash left the restroom. Leaving Jeremy Strohmeyer alone with the girl. Once Jermey’s crimes wee committed, he left the restroom. Jeremy Strohmeyer told David Cash about his crime of molestation and murder, before leaving the scene with Mr. Cash. Leaving the scene, the two boys did not report any crimes.

Pros: David Cash had a very positive outcome compared to the other parties involved. He was not charged with witnessing the crime or accessory to murder. Since there was no evidence that he took part in the crime, David Cash did not face jail time. Because David was not charged with a crime, the university chancellor decided to keep David Cash enrolled in his studies. Mr. Cash was neither suspended nor expelled.

After the offense, Jeremy Strohmeyer confessed his crimes to his friend, giving a proper confession for his crimes. Because David Cash was a witness of his crimes and confession, Jeremy Strohymere could be rightfully charged with the crime of murder and rape.

This incident made the state of Nevada come to the conclusion that they needed a new law to protect more victims. In, 1999 a Shericce Iverson Bill was put in place. This bill would require any Nevadans to report crimes they see if the crimes involve a violent act towards a child. Why didn’t David Cash attempt to stop Jeremy Strohmeyer? Did David Cash know the law would protect him? Would the seven-year-old girl be here today if David Cash stopped the altercation? Why did Jeremy Confess?

Cons: The violent act of Jeremy Strohmeyer resulted in the molestation and death of a seven-year-old girl, named Sherrice Iverson. He murdered and raped a little girl. From David Cash’s decision to ignore the crime, Jeremy Strohmeyer was able to get away with it for a short amount of time. Eventually, his negative actions caught up with him. Mr. Strohmeyer was arrested and charged with murder.

The people at the casino were lost and confused. For some, Jeremy Strohmeyer’s arrest could be seen as a con. That is not the case for most, however. Should he be sentenced to death? Would that crime be ethical or moral? Did Strohmeyer plan to kill a person before the incident took place? What do the parents think? Was justice truly served?

David Cash’s decision to not report the crime is only truly known by him. Sherrice Iverson lost her life, because of two unknown strangers. Her parents were most likely devastated as a result of her death. Did he know of the laws? Was he too afraid too? Did he not care about the safety of the little girl? Why didn’t he decide to make an Anonymous tip after Jeremy Strohmeyer confessed?

While it may be a good thing to David that the university chancellor chose to keep David in school. This decision was controversial to most. Since the university chancellor chose to keep David in school, this resulted in many cons for David. David’s friends and classmates turned against him. Protests were held against him. People were angry. Could the university do more? Why did they side with David?

Conclusion/Opinion: I do not believe any adult parties that were named acted morally in this situation. The little seven-year-old girl, named Sherrice Iverson, was the only named party in this situation who we can say, was not unethical. Jeremy Strohmeyer’s actions from the moment he entered the casino were not ethical or moral. In the end, the people agreed that his actions were not moral. This is why Jeremy Strohmeyer was later arrested and charged. Some questions that could be asked include the following. Did he plan ahead? Was this not premeditated murder? Did he really feel like he had to do this?

David Cash was another party who did not act in the right manner. His actions were unethical and morally wrong. At first, he attempted to help. He tried to pull David away and knocked off his hat. However, he gave up soon after. Helping as much as he did could be considered ethical to some. However, I believe it is unethical because he could have done more to save a little girl’s life. Mr. Cash could have run for help, called the cops, or notify someone outside the restroom. To me, David’s conduct was immoral and unethical. Why did he not do more? Was he acting in his best interest?

The decision of the university chancellor is controversial. Since the laws protected David, they did not have a legal reason to expel or suspend him. I believe the decision of the university chancellor was unethical. David Cash could have saved a girl’s life. He could have prevented a serious crime. However, he chose not too. The reason this decision is controversial is because of the people’s opinion. Some students disagreed with this decision which leads to protests. Others left David Cash alone. Why did the students feel like this? Do we have a right to judge the decision of the university chancellor? Were they only following the laws?

investigation
Like

About the Creator

Courtney Keller

I am still learning.

Reader insights

Be the first to share your insights about this piece.

How does it work?

Add your insights

Comments

There are no comments for this story

Be the first to respond and start the conversation.

Sign in to comment

    Find us on social media

    Miscellaneous links

    • Explore
    • Contact
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Support

    © 2024 Creatd, Inc. All Rights Reserved.