The Trial of the "Subway Vigilante"

The story of a man who allegedly killed four boys after racially profiling them. 

The Trial of Bernhard Goetz

The trial of Bernhard Goetz, also known as the "Subway Vigilante" case, was a highly publicized criminal case in New York City in the 1980s. Goetz, a white electrical engineer, shot four young African American men on a subway train after they allegedly tried to rob him. The case sparked a debate about self-defense and race relations in the city.

On December 22, 1984, Goetz was riding the subway when he was confronted by four young men, Troy Canty, Barry Allen, James Ramseur, and Darrell Cabey. According to Goetz, the men demanded money and he believed they were going to attack him, so he pulled out a gun and shot them. Three of the men were injured, while Cabey was left paralyzed from the waist down. Goetz fled the scene and turned himself in to the police several days later.

Goetz was charged with attempted murder, assault, and criminal possession of a weapon. The case quickly gained national attention, with many people rallying behind Goetz as a hero who was defending himself against violent criminals. Others, however, saw the case as an example of racial profiling, as Goetz had assumed the four men were dangerous based solely on their race.

The trial took place in 1987 and was highly publicized. The arguments presented in the Bernhard Goetz trial were centered around the issue of self-defense and the use of deadly force. Goetz's defense team argued that he acted in self-defense when he shot the four young men, who he believed were going to attack him. They pointed to the fact that Goetz had been mugged before and had a valid concealed carry permit for his weapon, indicating that he had a legitimate fear for his safety.

On the other hand, the prosecution argued that Goetz's actions were not justified as self-defense. They pointed out that Goetz had fled the scene and turned himself in to the police several days later, indicating that he knew what he had done was wrong. They also pointed to the fact that Goetz had shot the men multiple times, even after they were no longer a threat. This, they argued, showed that Goetz had not acted in self-defense, but rather had acted out of anger and a desire for revenge.

One of the most controversial aspects of the case was the issue of race. Goetz was white and the four men he shot were African American, leading some to argue that Goetz's actions were motivated by racial bias. The prosecution argued that Goetz had assumed the men were dangerous based solely on their race, and that this was a clear example of racial profiling. The defense, however, countered that Goetz's actions were motivated by fear for his safety, not by any racial bias.

Ultimately, the jury found Goetz not guilty of attempted murder but guilty of criminal possession of a weapon and reckless endangerment. This verdict reflected the complex nature of the case and the competing arguments presented by both sides. While the defense argued that Goetz acted in self-defense, the prosecution argued that his actions were motivated by anger and a desire for revenge. The jury ultimately sided with the defense, indicating that they believed Goetz's actions were justified as self-defense.

The trial of Bernhard Goetz had a lasting impact on the criminal justice system in New York City and beyond. It sparked a debate about self-defense and the use of deadly force, as well as the role of race in the criminal justice system. Many saw Goetz's actions as justified, while others saw them as an example of racial profiling and a lack of respect for the lives of young African American men. Regardless of one's perspective, the case remains a controversial and significant moment in the history of criminal justice in the United States.

Suraj Pangal

Suraj Pangal is currently a 12th grader who has had a passion for criminal law since a very young age. He has had 3 years of experience in criminal law. Most notably, Suraj assisted a former assistant district attorney of Santa Clara with the defense of a suspect charged with two counts of first-degree murder. Recently, Suraj has been involved with the defense of a suspected MS-13 member charged with racketeering under the RICO statute. His hobbies include researching old lawsuits, their history, and the reasoning behind the final rulings. He started this blog to share his most interesting findings with his readers and is proud to write these compelling pieces to his readers weekly.

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post