The Crime of Complicity

The Crime of Complicity[Reading] ➿ The Crime of Complicity By Amos N. Guiora – If you are a bystander and witness a crime should intervention to prevent that crime be a legal obligation Or is moral responsibility enoughAmos Guiora addresses these profoundly important uestions an If you are a bystander and witness a crime should intervention to prevent that crime be a legal obligation Or is moral responsibility enoughAmos Guiora addresses these profoundly important uestions and the bystander victim relationship from a deeply personal and legal perspective focusing on the Holocaust and then exploring cases in contemporary societySharing the experiences of his parents who were Holocaust survivors and his grandparents who did not survive and drawing on a wide range of historical material and interviews Guiora The Crime eBook Þ examines the bystander during three distinct events death marches the German occupation of Holland and the German occupation of Hungary He explains that while the Third Reich created policy its implementation was dependent on bystander non interventionBringing the issue of intervention into current perspective he examines sexual assault cases at Vanderbilt and Stanford Universities as well as other crimes where bystanders chose whether or not to intervene and the resulting conseuencesAfter examining the intensely personal example of his own parents’ survival of the Holocaust Guiora asserts that a society cannot rely on morals and compassion alone in determining our obligation to help another in danger It is ultimately he concludes a legal issue According to Guiora we must make the obligation to intervene the law and thus non intervention a crime. Even after reading and thinking a lot about lawyer Amos Guiora's 'The Crime of Complicity The Bystander in the Holocaust I'm still disturbed and confused about the book Guiora who was born in Israel and raised in both the United States and Israel has practiced law in both countries Currently he works at the University of Utah and is the author many books on terrorism and world affairs He is also the son of Holocaust survivors and it is the ideas of standing by while others are taken that is the subject of this bookGuiora's family on both sides were Hungarian Jews His paternal grandparents were murdered in Auschwitz when the Germans invaded Hungary in Spring 1944 His father survived the war but was in a work camp and his mother and grandmother survived the Nazi occupation of Budapest through basically moving around and just plain luck They were selected to be murdered by the Arrow Cross the Hungarian Nazis but the shooting in stopped before it reached them Both parents emigrated to Israel after the war met and marriedAmos Guiora's book attempts to make sense out of how Jews were rounded up and sent to the concentration camps He looks at the bystanders those Christians who watched silently as their Jewish friends and neighbors were marched off to those trains that took them to their fates He also looks at others who actually aided in the Nazi's attempts to make Europe Judenrein He makes the valid point that in Holland Hungary and Germany people knew bad things were going on to the Jews taken As the war dragged on the horrors of the camps were becoming known But why did most people do nothing to help? I think almost everyone knows that abject fear kept most people from helping Fear of getting involved in a dangerous situation and maybe being taken themselves Okay some Christians helped their neighbors Jews were hidden by people who cared who weren't scared of the authorities and were in a position to help But most did not and I can understand why most did not It's called human nature and its unfortunately a primal force in most humansAnd here's where Amos Giora's book seems to go off track He writes about people who help other people in trouble and people who don't People who watch or ignore bad situations they could help He uses himself as an example when he writes about ignoring the cries of a young boy who has been locked out of his house on a cold night by his parents apparently as some form of punishment He doesn't call the police to help the child even though he admits he could have done so anonymously No he just goes about his business and assumes the boy was let into his house eventually This part of the book is at 63% and is titled My Neighbor's Child I went back and reread the passage several times to make sure I was interpreting it correctly I thought he could be writing it as a hypothetical situation but he wasn't It really happened He doesn't refer to it again in the book that I can find I was so disturbed by this one point because it was written with a blandness I could find nowhere else in the book He rightly castigates others for basically doing the same thing in different circumstances Now perhaps he was pointing out that ANYBODY could ignore the plight of others in troubled times I just don't know and in a way it upsets the book's major point In this book law professor Amos Guiora provides a persuasive argument for the creation of a new law one that compels bystanders to intervene or face criminal punishment There are of course factors of the new law that make it reasonable than any single sentence could Professor Guiora's argument is well thought out and clearly articulated At times it felt like there was some fluff but overall the book tracked well and got to the point without meandering too far “Poet Edward Yashinsky “Fear only the indifferent who permit the killers and betrayers to walk safely on the earth””Interestingly Amos Guiora is a Professor of Law at the University of Utah He’s also a Lieutenant Colonel Ret in the Israel Defense Forces His parents survived the Holocaust; his grandparents did not In this book he discusseshow the Holocaust happened and explores current crimes when the victim was harmed because a bystander did nothing to intervene or call 911 for help He believes that legislation is needed to compel bystanders to “do the right thing” and intervene when witnessing a crime I admit in the beginning this did seem a bit excessive However I found his argument compelling and the proposed legislation very reasonable “Any person at the scene of an emergency who knows that another person is exposed to or has suffered grave physical harm shall to the extent that the person can do so without danger or peril to self or others give reasonable assistance to the exposed person Reasonable assistance may include obtaining or attempting to obtain aid from law enforcement or medical personnel A person who violates this section shall be fined not that 500”I believe most of us will choose to intervene to help to offer assistance to call 911 instead of looking the other way or ignoring the situation However there are some who need a law to compel them to do the right thing This example solidified the concept for me and I support legislation It is from a horrific gang rape case at Vanderbilt University in 2013“The bystander Mack Prioleau a fellow football player pretended to be asleep on the upper bunk while the victim was raped sodomized an otherwise violated for over thirty minutesHe testified that he knew exactly what was going on but failed to intervene because the situation ‘made him uncomfortable’ he was not charged with any crime nor was he suspended from the university”UnbelievableSo I did some research If other witnesses are present people are less likely to help a victim This is called the Bystander Effect To rephrase ‘ the greater the number of bystanders the less likely it is that one of them will help’ WikipediaOnly 10 states have duty to act legislation California Florida Hawaii Massachusetts Minnesota Ohio Rhode Island Vermont Washington and WisconsinLast year in 2018 the Utah legislature failed to pass a duty to assist bill sponsored by Rep Brian King I’m incredibly disappointed This was frustrating to read I am intrigued by the example of the bystander in the Holocaust how does the bystander who is not directly victimized act morally in opposition to the immoral acts of the state? This uestion is difficult and relevant and the answer necessarily exists outside the legal system of that stateHowever that uestion is not addressed in this book Somehow this author reflects on the Holocaust and concludes that there is a legal solution to the bystander problem the bystander must call the police This thesis makes his extremely justified criticism of the Holocaust bystanders sound and ridiculous Don't be a bystander Call theSS? I'm mad at this book for making a criticism of bystanders in the Holocaust sound ridiculous There is no reflection on the limitations of the criminal justice system on the findings of books like The New Jim Crow and the effects of increased criminalization like the War on Drugs on marginalized communities There is no evidence presented that imposing criminal liability for bystanders who fail to contact the police will prevent violent crimes or necessarily help the victimsThe only effects of the proposed legislation that seem certain to me are 1 that our high incarceration rate would increase and 2 that ordinary citizens and residents would feel pressure to err on the side of initiating police involvement Which sounds like the next generation of German history The author is a lawyer and can't seem to escape a lawyerly approach to his book on the role of bystanders in the holocaust He also can't stay on topic as he brings in other examples of bystanders failing to aid victims during crimes I think this book was cathartic for the author as his parents and grandparents were survivors and victims respectively of the holocaust and he seems haunted by the circumstances of their persecution That issue is why I was interested in the book and picked it up Other than passing laws to reuire providing aid the author has no solutions to offer to the problem Sadly there are too many echos of the situation America today I'm thinking of ICE deportations and situations like Charlottesville The current political climate promotes the us versus them and outsider mentality that emboldens people to victimize others eg numerous reports of go back to where you came from The Burke uote that all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing applies and accuses today Thought provoking Compelling Extremely thought provoking The author needed a good editor to make this book readable and reduce the redundancy Good theory and ideas Not well written Redundant an scattered As a U Alum I receive their periodical magazines and saw a blurb about this book I had to read it This was essentially a 200 page persuasive essay and I found it thought provoking engrossing and compelling Mr Guiora is careful to consider what naysayers would say about his proposal criminalizing bystanders that don't notify the authorities when a victim is in danger The Holocaust was a fascinating and frightening context for which the book was laid out I found my natural curiosity of people and their experiences allowing me to really enjoy this book Sometimes I forget I had a minor in political science and that I really love the concepts of politics if not the politics themselves This is recommended for similar law loving nerds like myself

The Crime of Complicity ePUB ✓ The Crime  eBook
  • Hardcover
  • 220 pages
  • The Crime of Complicity
  • Amos N. Guiora
  • 17 July 2016
  • 9781634257312