Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    I have had similar feelings and I cannot get this family out of my
    mind.  Although each murder and each crime that I read about evokes
    emotion I think that this one touches me more because the media has
    allowed us to get very close to the reality.  Hearing the conversation
    between Charles Stuart and the dispatcher was very disconcerting. 
    Knowing that he is laying in a bed across the street from my apartment
    makes me want to go over there and do something.  And knowing that
    Carol Stuart died of a violent crime in a city I love where we as
    citizens and the government are doing everything possible to reduce the
    crime is extremely frustrating.
    
    As co-moderator I want to gently remind readers that Andy is asking
    'why this crime is effecting him more than others he has read about'.
    
     

    
    I too am very upset about it.  I had watch it on the news last night, 
    and listened it on the radio this morning.    
    
    What kind of "ANIMAL" would do such a heartless thing? 
    
    Tears fell when I heard Charles Stuart speaking to the dispatcher.  I 
    can only imagine what this poor man is going through.....
    
    Our prayers are with him and his family.  
     
    			Life is sooooooo @%$#@&# unfair.
    
   Maria
                                                             

    I have also had similar feelings.  I think that we are so bombarded
    by tragedies by the media that, sooner or later, one is going to
    come along that bothers us to excess, and we feel we can't take
    any more.  Sometimes I feel that I have to shut out these news stories,
    that I just can't keep feeling bad for people, so sometimes I don't
    pay much attention to certain news items.  I haven't paid close
    attention to this shooting because I just couldn't handle getting
    emotionally involved with it so soon after the earthquake.  Of course,
    I think it's a horrible thing.  As a matter of fact, it popped into
    my mind as I was walking into work this morning.  I thought, that's
    how it could be, you could be just walking along minding your own
    business, and some stranger decides to shoot you, and that's it,
    it's over.  I don't know how to deal with that knowledge.  I don't
    know why it has to happen to some people while others get to live
    to be 80 yrs. old or more.  I'm not religious at all so that doesn't
    help me.  In fact, I feel if there is a god he/she/it has a lot of 
    explaining to do.
    
    Last week as I listened to the stories of the earthquake I began
    to have a feeling of horror, because I found myself trying to imagine
    what it was like for those people who got crushed on the highway.
     It's just too horrible to imagine.  But, so are many things - war,
    random violence, horrible diseases.
    
    It's good for people to care what happens to others.  If nobody
    did, it would be a worse world.  But, somehow we have to come to
    terms with the fact that horrible things happen to people who don't
    deserve it, and still be able to enjoy our lives.  What I've found
    whenever some tragedy really starts to haunt me - like the earthquake
    or that plane crash in Iowa this summer or even reading about the
    haulocaust - that if I force myself to put it out of my mind and
    go see a light-hearted movie, or read a book about something entirely
    different, get together with friends and listen to what's going
    on in their lives, go to work, etc., that eventually just dealing
    with everyday life as I go along makes the horror fade away because
    I just forget about it.  I may as well forget about it if I can't
    do anything to make anything better.  It won't do the world any
    good if I go quietly crazy over all the terrible things that happen.
    
    Well, .0, I don't have an answer, but just wanted to share these
    thoughts.
    
    Lorna
    
    to do.

    Like Lorna I've adoped the attitude of "I may as well forget about
    it if I can't do anything to make anything better."  But somehow
    I can't forget about it, whether "IT" is the most recent shooting
    in Boston or Desryn being insulted by a red-neck at the gas station
    or poor people being displaced by the earthquake -- the list could
    go on and on.
    
    But recently I've become concerned that I'm developing a thick callus
    that insulates me from any feeling of shock or horror.  I don't
    like that thought OR its implications.
    
    So now I'm asking myself -- and you -- what CAN I do about these
    things?  Is the problem our society is facing perhaps a problem of
    too many of us feeling helpless against the odds and therefore doing
    nothing?  Are there any realistic actions we can take that would/could
    mitigate the situation?
    
    And, God help us, why did it take the senseless death of a white
    woman -- when people of color have been dying violent deaths in the
    streets of Boston for years -- to wake us up to this mess?
                                                        
    Sorry.  It looks like I have more questions than answers.
    Karen                                              

    Re .4, Karen, I think the answer to your question of why did it
    take the death of a white woman to wake us up when people of color
    have often been victims of violent crime is, if "us" means white
    women, then it make us realize that it could be *us.*
    
    She didn't make the mistake of letting a stranger into her house
    or her car, in which case many of us can feel better by saying,
    *I* wouldn't do anything that careless.  She was just walking along,
    minding her own business, a white, middleclass woman, and somebody
    shot her.  It makes us realize that no matter what we do, we can't
    completely make certain that nothing bad will happen to us.  It's
    closer to home than many deaths we hear about.
    
    Lorna
    

"I feel if there is a god he/she/it has a lot of explaining to do."

God is not responsible for this tragedy.  Humans have free will; *they* are
responsible for thier actions, not God.

'I was taught to think of myself as part of humankind. 'No man is an island' and
all that.  Whenever humankind is diminished, it affects me, I am diminished.
Whenever I hear of a robbery, mugging, theft, earthquake, I am affected.  That
is why the news became an obsession with me, and why my wife cutting me off from
the news drove me into seclusion.'

'And now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go and 'diminish' humankind right
back...'

From 'And Now The News', a SF short story.

Me, I don't listen to the news.  It's not that I don't care, it's that me
reading the news isn't going to help anyone, and it's going to hurt me.  I'd
rather concentrate on those that I can reach, than you.

Jim.

    I'm SO glad this note is here. I felt so incredibly bummed out this
    morning about this incident. I woke up with a wonderful new tune in my
    head, which I wrote out with delight after breakfast. I drove off to
    work looking at the gorgeous blue sky and the still-brilliant foliage,
    and am simply overwhelmed with the shattering contrasts life offers.
    I felt as if this happenned to one of my own loved ones, and I have to
    live with the knowledge that violence is on the increase, and the
    likelyhood is increasing that myself or my loved ones may be
    vicitmized. Makes me not want to care about anything sometimes. 
    
    But as I sat with the pain in my head, I realized, that beyond grieving
    the loss of innocence this kind of incident enforces on me, any further
    focusing on it constitutes beating up on myself. I didn't create this
    crazy world, and I'm not going to better it by focusing on tragic
    events. I have lots to contribute and I can maximize that by focusing 
    on the good things I have to give out. Doing that also allows me to
    take in the good things other people have to give, too, like the
    sharing of feelings in this topic. Thanks, everybody.
                                 
    
    Scott

    Re .6, Jim, I know "God" isn't responsible for the shooting incident.
     When I said that I was thinking more in terms of the earthquake,
    aids, cancer - natural disasters and diseases.  If we didn't have
    those to contend with we'd have more time to devote to the problems
    people generate themselves such as violent crime.
    
    Lorna
    

    This sort of thing touches something deep within me.  Fear, perhaps,
    and my own sense of mortality.  I feel sad because I realize how easily
    this could have been me - and how quickly all semblance of control and
    feeling of security in my life can be ripped away from me.
    
    Perhaps, like me, you suddenly realize how vulnerable you are, how
    fragile life truly is, and how very much you truly love it.
    
    My heart goes out to you, too,
    
    Carol

    
    	This world is definitely full of cruel people.  I must admit,
    	I'm not overly proud to be a member of the human race.
    
    	Carla
    

    
    
                     BRING BACK THE DEATH PENALTY
    
        This might help curb some of the trash out there !!!

    
    Oh, Carla, how can you say that, especially when *you're* one of the
    members that makes humans the special beings that they are?
    
    *HUGS*
    
    Carol

    
    
    	Thank you all, I was unsure about the quality of human compassion
    this morning and I am again begining to realize that maybe there
    areenough people that have the ability to not just "blank it out"
    because they don't know the person that in the end maybe , even
    though it seems the worst of us are in control, we are a race that
    is caring enough not to let the end result be the end of us... 
    
    Thanks again
    Andy

    Mornin' Andy ... and all.
    
    I think that any horrible crime against another human forces us to
    realize just how close life and death walk along together. 
    
    In the past three or so years there are crimes like this that stand out
    in my mind:
    
    The man who shot all of those people at McDonalds in San Diego and then
    Killed himself. 
    
    The woman and her children in Townsend, MA. She was raped and shot, the
    children drowned.
    
    Now two innocent people are victimized because Stuart did not have a
    wallet.
    
    We can sit here and pour out our sorrow. We can let it roll off us like
    water off ducks' down. We can try to understand why and explain it so
    it makes us feel better. We can be sympathetic and try to console
    ourselves and the victims. Or....
    
    We can invoke severe and harsh penalties for crimes that act as a
    deterent. We can write to senators and reps and demand the death
    penalty for crimes. We can form action committees. We can demand that
    all crimes involving any weapon be a min. of 10 years w/o parole. We
    can demand that prisons be inhumane. 4 gray walls, no TV, no gyms, no
    radio, no nothing. We can refuse to pay $50,000 a year to keep a person
    in prison.
    
    Or we can do nothing but moan about the system and the way we
    perpetuate it. 
    
    Maybe, just maybe, we all feel a bit guilty because we all can do
    something and we don't. And these unspeakable continue, continue,
    continue........and we do nothing, nothing, nothing.
    
    To the Stuarts: I apologize for not making a walk from the hospital to
    car safer. I apologize for Mrs. Stuart never having the opportunity to
    see her child because I didn't take the time to write to my congressman
    after similar crimes have been committed. I apologize to the child who
    will never feel the warmth of his mother's body or her breath because I 
    didn't take some action that could have possibly caused action that may
    have prevented this act. 
    
    I promise that I will do SOMETHING positive today.
    
    Ken 

    I too am saddened and disgusted by the Stuart shootings, but what
    bothers me more than anything is the way people are complaining about
    the media coverage being blown up because the couple was white, upper
    middle class, and from suburbia.  What the *hell* difference do these
    factors make?  Didn't we grieve when Tiffany Moore was shot in Roxbury
    last summer?  And what about the mass murder of Asians in Allston (or
    someplace around there) about two years ago?
    
    Yes, I am one of the guilty who haven't given a second thought to
    drug and/or gang-related murders over the past year or so (my feelings
    were that if they were just killing each other off and not innocent
    people, it was somehow O.K.) I guess it's not O.K. anymore.
    I just pray that Charles and Christopher Stuart recover and can make a
    happy life for themselves and that Carol Stuart rests in peace.
    
    As for the person(s) responsible for this tragedy....
    
    Nancy-

    Re .15, the only point I was trying to make about the fact that
    she was a white, middle-class woman, is that when something happens
    to a person who is like "us" then it tends to hit home more because
    we have to realize that it could happen to us.  When we realize
    that something could happen to us, we may have stronger feelings
    of sympathy for the victim because we can relate to them more readily.
     If I hear of a black child in a ghetto-like/dangerous neighborhood
    being killed, I naturally think it's a horrible, terrible thing,
    but it doesn't hit as close to home and make me realize just how
    common random violence has become, because, afterall, I have never
    been a minority child in a ghetto, and neither has my daughter.
     It's easy for me to say to myself, with relief, thank God I don't
    have to live in Roxbury.  But, I can't say that about what happened
    to the Stuart's.
    
    Lorna
    

>    I too am saddened and disgusted by the Stuart shootings, but what
>    bothers me more than anything is the way people are complaining about
>    the media coverage being blown up because the couple was white, upper
>    middle class, and from suburbia.  What the *hell* difference do these
>    factors make?

The _difference_ that these factors make is *precisely* that they result 
in greater media coverage.  (Not that it's "blown up" necessarily, simply 
that there is more of it.)  To me, the statement that makes about our society
is worth complaining about.  Those factors *shouldn't* make any difference,
but the increased media hype is proof positive that they *do*.

For some of us, that has at least as much impact as the fact of the 
shootings.  Would you really prefer that that angle be ignored?

    Sharon

    A black man was murdered I believe the same evening as the
    Stuarts...and there is comment that his murder is going virtually
    unnoticed.  
    
    The Stuart's touched me because I felt personally involved after
    hearing the actual words spoke by Charles Stuart.
    
    One of the things I want to mention is that I am very proud of my
    neighbors.  They had a memorial service for the Stuarts because they
    wanted to apologize for what had happened in their neighborhood.  I do
    not think that many of you realize how hard some of these people are
    working to reclaim their neighborhoods.  There are some fine people in
    the Mission Hill section that are donating their time and energy to 
    reduce crime.

I think the aspect of this shooting that caused it to be noticed more was
that Carol Stuart was pregnant and that her premature baby was delivered.
This gives people an additional emotional hook - it certainly did for me.
Skin comes in many colors but children are universal.

				Steve

    I also beleive that the reason this case is getting so much attention,
    is that it was just plain 'senceless', I mean this person had NOTHING
    to gain by shooting them.. sure there has been alot of shootings in
    that area lately, but most of it has been 'gang' related, and we all
    know that they are fighting for their 'turf'.  Not a good reason, I
    know, there really isn't a reason for killing someone, but this family
    was innocent, just like 'little' Tiffiney. (spelling is off I know :-). 
    I think that if the Death Penalty came back, then crime would drop ALOT
    and FAST, at least if someone kills another human being, then they have
    something to be affraid for, I mean its like Kids, give them rules to
    live by, and stick to the rules, and they are going to 'think' twice
    before doing it.  I bet anything that with all those shootings that
    they have been having in the Boston area, if and when they find the
    guilty party, and they were to get the 'death' sentence, then all those
    other 'guilty' parties would really think twice before pulling that
    trigger... 

 Alot has been made of the apparent "difference" in reporting this crime than
the many gang related murders that occur with dizzying frequency in the
war torn streets of greater Boston.

 Here are a number of reason why this crime garnered such media support and
public outcry:

 Man and woman were randomly picked

 Woman was pregnant- baby delivered though mother died

 A lengthy call by the victims talking to the State police dispatcher was 
available.

 No other major stories occurred on the same day.

 I would wager if the same thing happened to a black couple, with all of the 
same circumstances, the difference in coverage would have been slight.

 The Doctah

"I think that if the Death Penalty came back, then crime would drop ALOT and
FAST,"

You would think so, wouldn't you...  however, I believe (I could be wrong) that
statistics do not support that theory.  I don't know why not.

Let's face it when yur life is miserable, perhaps the threat of death is not
meaningfull.  ''Freedom's' just another way of saying 'nothing left to lose''...

On the other hand, a 'death' sentence is a hell of a lot cheaper to carry out
then a 'life' sentence.  I don't like paying for criminals' life sentences.

Jim.

    Wihtout trying to turn this into a Death Penalty vs. Cruel and Inhuman
    punishement arguement, I'd like to address a bit of what was said
    in the prevoius reply and a reply before that. And then an opinion
    on the subject of media coverage according to social stature.
    
    Something to the extent of "if there was a death penalty, crimes
    would drop" was made, with the gentle counter of there have been
    statistics to show otherwise (one of the arguments made by those
    opposed to the death penalty is that it doesn't significantly do
    anything about the crime rate).
    
    I hold that IF the death penalty was mandatory for many violent
    crimes (or perhaps violence as a condition is being too lenient),
    and IF there was not the everlasting, long, involved, convuluted
    appeal process, if the sentance was given, and carried out in an
    expediant manner, then the crime rate would probably drop.  Many
    people who have been sentanced to death simply languish on death
    row for years and years and years before their sentence gets carried
    out (the numbers are very surprising--I dont think California, for
    example, has executed anyone in the last ten years, or even before,
    and we DO have a death penalty).  To draw a bad analogy, its like
    threatening a child with a spanking if he does something wrong,
    then rarely carrying it out (or worse yet, turning it into a simple
    slap on the hand).  "You'll be in REAL trouble if you do this--maybe."
    Consistency is the key.  If I thought I could get away with murder,
    or get off relatively "light", and was inclined to do so, I might
    just kill someone with little expectation of repercussion.
    
    To turn back on topic, (sorta), I think the issue of the couple
    being white, middle class, pregnant, etc and therefore having more
    media coverage than say, a black, lower class person is pretty much
    on the mark.  Without trying to sound too cynical, white, middle
    class, relatively young, with a kid *is* probably most people's
    vision of your "average" people.  You got your hubby, you wife,
    your child, your nice, basic Middle America--and then they get wasted,
    apparantly senselessly.  It's suddenly NOT all those poverty,
    crime-stricken minorities getting caught in the gunfire of gangs
    or what not.  We all KNOW, don't we, that lower class neighborhoods
    are prone to crime?  I mean, we all KNOW people get killed ther
    all the time, just as senselessly as these two folks getting shot
    in their car, don't we?  But hey, that's life in the urban ghettos,
    right?  And when we see that on the news, we kinda say, "Gee, too
    bad, *I* sure wouldn't live there" and go on to sports and weather.
    
    But when Mr. and Mrs. Average and Son get pegged by a wacko with
    a gun, suddenly we are out of the ghetto and into "That's terrible!"
    territory and the media, newsdogs as they are, pick up on it and
    probably will run it into the ground.  Mind you, I haven't seen
    anything locally on this shooting, but heard about it from an appalled
    friend in CT, who was also saddened and horrified by it.  (I was
    far less saddened and horrified and basically said, "That happens
    all the time", but I sure don't wanna expand upon that segment of
    my views since it would probably only make fellow-and much more
    compassionate-noters jump up and down on my fragile face, and with
    3000 miles of road facing me this weekend as well as a dinner date
    at the other end, I want my face intact :).
    
    I guess the "moral" to this story is that yes, it CAN happen to
    you, the black couple next door, the hispanic one in the housing
    project, or that really rich guy who dines with Donald Trump.  People
    with guns, and especially stressed people, don't need sociological
    flowcharts to decide who they wanna shoot.  It can be your car,
    the way you look, where you are, or even your cellular telephone.
    
    Sad, yes.  But very very common and very very true.
    
    kim

    just consider the average jail term in prison for murder is twelve years....
    
    the victim/victim's familys term is forever...
    
    alittle retribution is in order.
    
    give the death penalty a chance...
    
    Its too bad the DUKE overrode the people's majority vote and vetoed the
    death penalty in the past....

     I am saddened that this senseless crime happened.  However, I am
    appalled at the somewhat overblown reaction in the media, and somewhat
    even here in this notesfile. Where was all this concern for "public
    safety" when people (innocent bystanders) were shot in Roxbury, as
    happened earlier this year? There have been murders in Boston and
    surrounding towns which have barely made the local news, and yet this 
    incident made it to CNN, and presumably to other national news services
    as well.
     What makes THIS case special?   Was it because, perhaps, the tape
    recording of the man talking to the police dispatcher on his cellular
    phone was made available to the press, and we have once again been
    manipulated by the media?  Gee, we have a recording of somebody dying;
    let's use it!!!
     Was it that the woman was very pregnant, and we had the drama of the
    "saving of the child" to jerk everyone's heartstrings? America seems to
    be going through a phase where the unborn have more rights than the
    living, and this story fits nicely into the fashion. Children have been
    left without one or both parents because of senseless acts of violence;
    often the best they can hope for is relative obscurity in a state-run
    home. Why is this child different? Do you want to bet that someone
    will start an "appeal"/"telethon" to help care for poor <whatever>
    Stuart?
    
     Sigh!  I didn't mean for this to turn out as a flame, but it is a hot
    spot for me.  I am reminded of an old Richard Prior line in which he
    (paraphrased mightily) commented that when only the blacks were taking
    drugs, then drugs were a "problem".  When white kids started taking
    drugs, then drugs became an "epidemic", a "crisis"!
     I see the same thing here. Perhaps not based on race, but based
    perhaps more on "class" ... "Good heavens, Muffy, they've started
    killing yuppies" ... and it appalls me.  
    
     I see nothing particularly special about this case; it is certainly no
    more terrible, no more awful than the dozens of murders which have
    taken place in the Greater Boston Area this year. And I still don't
    know why there has been the media "explosion" about this one.
    
    					A cynical Nigel

     On the other hand, if all this media hype makes even a FEW people
    realise the impact of violence and brutality in our present society,
    then perhaps some of them will start working to make the cities safer
    for EVERYONE, regardless of race, creed or model of cellular phone! 
    
     I should point out that I've been spending a few weekends and evenings
    filming (well, videotaping for you purists out there) part of a
    documentary which our local cable tv company is putting together. I've
    been in some of the less glamorous areas of Boston, Roxbury, Revere,
    Lawrence and even Manchester NH -- it has been a real eye-opener for
    me! There are people out there whose quality of life is terrible, and
    I've by no means seen the bottom of the heap! And the violence, the
    poverty and the general misery is part of everyday life for these
    people. Over half the people that I have seen, that our crew has talked
    to, have suffered loss or injury because of incidents of violence that
    in their own way are every bit as terrible as the Stuart incident. 
    
     This filming experience has opened my eyes, let me tell you.  I'm
    still raw at the edges, and I'm still trying to figure out what *I* can
    do to make things better for these people.
    
    
    				Your neighbourhood cynical
    						Nigel

I think what is perhaps most disturbing about incidents like this is the
feeling that things are out of control.  Our best efforts don't seem to be
working.  While I agree we can no longer afford to sit passively by as the
violence escalates around us, I disagree with some of the responses suggested.

I don't think we can stop violence by striking back with violence [actions
intended to harm others].  This is like trying to quench your thirst with
salt water.  Although it feels like you're doing something, it actually makes
the problem worse.

This is incredibly hard to accept.  We've been conditioned all our lives
to respond to violence or threats of violence with counter force.  But
the world has changed.  It doesn't work anymore.

The people who commit these crimes are not well adjusted individuals who
carefully weigh the consequences of their actions.  More likely they are
people who have experienced so much hopelessness, injustice, or violence
in their lives, that they are acting out of anger and/or desparation.

Deterence literally means to frighten, to control by fear. 
We have a 40% drop out rate in our high schools, massive unemployment,
poverty, drug addiction, homelessness, street violence.  Do we really
think more fear will help?  These people don't have a lot left to lose.
If we don't value their lives, why should they value ours?  What are we
teaching people when we try to use violence or threats to deal with our
problems?

It's not us against them, it's us and them.
That's what it means to live in an interdependent world.

The most important thing we can do, and also the most difficult,
is to change the way we think.  [Not "what" we think, but the "way" we think]

- Peter

    
    .18 they have found the man who shot him and he is in jail now...
    	just because he was black didn't make the difference I think
    	the reason that it wasn't as highly publicized is that Carol
    	Stuart was pregnant
    

My note is a little off the original so Mr. Moderator please feel free to 
delete it...

>Note 884.24                   FEELINGS FOR VICTIMS                      24 of 27
>
>    Wihtout trying to turn this into a Death Penalty vs. Cruel and Inhuman
>    punishement arguement, 

Too late the discussion is there. In this part of the world the only news 
about the murder was read in the notes file... So my comments are more 
towards note 884.24 than the original note.
 
There are some interesting things about the death penalty. The death row 
system in the US is considered by the other half of the civilised world to 
be so cruel (whether execution takes place or not) that the last time the 
US sought extradition of a murderer from Europe it was refused until the 
murder charge/ and the implied death row risk was removed.... The us has 
the the most gruesome methods of execution in the civilised world.. e.g the 
electric chair, where America� has the enjoyment of seing the person fry 
for about 15 minutes. That and the gas chamber which is specially fitted with 
glass sides (like TV). 
All this being said America has the highest murder rate in the civilised 
world.
A news item that might not have reached the US. The death penalty lobby has 
been dealt the 'death blow' in Britain. Some terrorists convicted 15 years 
ago have been pardoned. It is believed that the police framed them. 
	From

            Stephen.who.hates.paying.for.these.people's.existence...But?�?.
                   ....who.also.believes.in.revenge..

�  being the representative of the people invited to see justice being done.
>

    The killer has NOT been arrested. The suspects are narrowed to four.
    
    Changing the way we think won't do squat. Take a walk in Central Park
    on a moonless night and tell a mugger that you've changed the way you
    think in the 10 seconds you have left in this world.
    
    The death penalty will guarantee a reduction in murder if it's invoked
    within 90 days of the sentence. That will force lawyers to get off
    their collective duffs and start the appeal. The law should also have a
    provision for an appeal board to review these cases and agree to have
    cases retried. Technicalities don't count. Only evidence that's new or
    was questionable can allow a case to be retried. If the defendent loses
    the case, the lawyer must pay the states costs. No more "my client
    wasn't allowed to wear his shoes because they had laces, therefore his
    rights were violated" crap. He did the crime, he pays this time. The
    executions should be scheduled for TV at specific times to make the
    needed impact and deterent. The execution should be the same manner
    that the prisoner killed his/her victim. Gunshot, Strangulation, etc.
    Mechanical devices can be made to eliminate human interaction.
    
    Lastly, we have to be allowed to carry our own guns. laws against guns
    just us easier prey for those with guns. They don't go to the local
    sports shop and fill out paperwork 2-3 weeks in advance of a crime to
    buy a gun!!!! They know that 99% of the population doesn't have a
    weapon of any kind on their person. Train people how to use a weapon
    and take care of it. If you've got a gun, you equal to or better than
    your attacker because you've been professionally trained.
    
    This may seem harsh, but we as the "normal" citizenry have a right to
    enjoy our lives in the light and the dark. We should be equally safe in
    either environment. 
    
    Ken

    
    	Re: Fight back
    
    	Wasn't there a city in Florida that asked people to buy guns?
    	I remember seeing a news show about it. The Police chief announced
    	that the Police could no longer protect it's citizens, so he
	advised people to get gun permits and carry them. They couldn't
    	be concealed, so people wore side holsters ala the old West.
    	Has a study been done about their crime rate? The show told about
    	a would be mugger that got blown away by a woman, and a fast
    	food manager blew away a would be robber. I think their crime rate
    	went down dramatically.
    
    	Guy
    

    OK..OK I've softened alittle on the death penalty.....I support the
    alternative method suggested in the following article by Dave Barry - 
    GIVE'M BART instead...
    


		THE CASE OF THE AMOROUS TURTLE

	By Dave Barry, Pulitzer Prize winning columnist
     copied from the Boston Sunday Globe, October 22, 1989

You can imagine how alarmed I was when I found out that I had been swimming in
the same waters as the Giant Perverted Turtle.  Unless of course you have not
yet heard about the Giant Perverted Turtle, in which case please be advised
that, until we get this thing cleared up, you should avoid submerging yourself
in any body of water unless it has a drain and a soap dish.

I found out about this story when numerous alert readers sent me an article 
from The Reporter, a newspaper published in the Florida Keys, headlined TURTLE
ATTACK IS REPORTED.  Immediately, I interrupted my regular journalism routine
of staring fixedly at individual pieces of ceiling dirt, because it just so
happens that my major hobby, aside from turning off lights and appliances that
have been turned on days earlier by my son, is scuba diving off the Florida
Keys.  You go out to the reef, bouncing over the waves, then you dive in and
admire the incredible variety of marine life that is attracted by other diving
enthusiasts barfing over the side of the charter boat.

No, really, you see some fascinating things down there.  I once got to see what
fishing looks like from the fish end.  There, dangling in the current, was a
largish hook, to which had been attached a disgusting thing such as you might be
served in a sushi restaurant.  Staring at this thing was a small gathering of
filefish, which is a fish with pursed lips and a bulging forehead that make it
look very serious, as though it should be carrying a little briefcase and doing
other fishes' tax returns.  As the other filefish watched, the first one would
swim forward, take the sushi in its mouth, spit out immediately, then swim to
the end of the line.  Then the next fish would repeat the procedure, and the
next, and so on.  ("Yuck!  You try it, Norm!" "OK!  Yuck!  You try it, Walter!" 
"OK!  Yuck!  You try it...")  If I had a waterproof pen and paper with me, I'd
have stuck a little note on the hook saying *"They don't like it."*

This experience gave me an idea.  Remember a couple of months back when
President Bush was taking his biweekly vacation up Kenneth E. Bunkport IV,
Maine, and he failed to catch any fish, day after day, until it became a
national news story of greater urgency than Lebanon, and the whole federal
government apparatus seemed to shudder to a halt while the Leader of the Free
World, the man most responsible for dealing with pressing and increasingly
complex national and international issues, was off somewhere trying to outwit
an organism with a brain the size of a hydrogen atom?  Well my idea is, next
time we have this problem, we send some US naval frogpersons down there to
attach a fish manually to the presidential hook.  These would have to be
trusted frogpersons, not pranksters, because America would definitely be a
laughingstock among nations if the president were to engage in a fierce three-
hour angling struggle and finally, triumphantly, haul out, say, a sheep.

But before we implement this program, we need to do something about the Giant
Perverted Turtle.  According to The Reporter article, written by outdoor writer
Bob T. Epstein, there's a very aggressive male 300-pound loggerhead turtle that
lurks in the water under one of the bridges in the Florida Keys and  - I am not
making this up - keeps trying, very forcefully, to *mate with human divers*. 
What is worse, Epstein says, in at least one case the turtle actually
*succeeded*.  I'm not going to give the details of this occurrence in a family
newspaper, except  to say that if we ever decide we need some form of
punishment harsher than the death penalty, this would be a strong candidate.

	JUDGE:  I sentence the defendant to be put in the lagoon with Bart.

	DEFENDANT:  No!  Not the turtle!

I called up one of the divers who'd reportedly been attacked, a real estate
agent named Bruce Gernon, who confirmed the whole thing, but asked me to stress
that he successfully fought the turtle off.  So let the record show that the
turtle did not get to first base with Mr. Gernon.  But clearly we have a
serious problem here.  Bob Epstein told me that, since his story appeared, he
has been contacted almost daily by people who have been molested by large sea
creatures but never told anybody.  "This is a sensitive area," Epstein said. 
"People are reluctant to talk about that aspect of their relationships with
turtles or seals or dolphins or walruses."

Did you hear that?  *Walruses*.

	(DEFENDANT:  *Nooooo!*)

Fortunately, this alarming story is getting attention from leading science
authorities:  Epstein told me  he has been contacted by both the Letterman
*and* Sajak shows.  So action is being taken, and not a moment too soon,
either, because - this appears to be a related story - several alert readers
have sent me an Associated Press article stating that two marine biologists in
a submarine 690 feet deep, far off the coast of Alaska, discovered, lying on
the ocean floor: a cow.  I am still not making this up.  Needless to say, the
cow was deceased.  God alone knows how it got there.  One obvious possibility
is prankster frogpersons, but we cannot rule out the possibility that the cow
was abducted by lust-crazed walruses.  Fortunately, the biologists were able to
make a videotape, starring Rob Lowe, so we should have some answers soon. 
Until then, I'm not going to even take a *shower*.  Not that this is anything
new.

    

    re .32, oh, yeah, I'd feel really safe in that environment!  :-(
     Instead of having to worry about occasional random violence, I'd
    have to worry about every single person in town shooting me!
    
    Somebody I know who used to live in Lebanon said that people who
    think everybody should carry a gun should have to live in Beirut
    for awhile and see how they like it.
    
    Lorna
    

    I don't think there is any such things as "occassional random
    violence".  If I remember correctly I've seen statistics that say
    something to the effect that these days 1 of 3 children will be the 
    victim of a violent crime in their lives....and 1 of 2 will be affected
    by a violent crime, and other alarming statements.
    
    Its all around us and not getting any better.  Something has to change.
    

    Re .35, well, gee, thanks.  I hope it doesn't happen to you, too.
    
    Although any amount of violent crime in a society is horrible, I
    think your statistics sound a bit high.  1/3, 1/2?    (We'd be dropping
    like flies at that rate.)
    
    Lorna
    

         Oh no, not here too!
    
                                     Greg

>         Oh no, not here too!

 You're right- bad call on my part. Problem solved.

         Thanks, Doc.
    
                                     Greg

Re:0 & rest.. 
A GIST OF:
 >>  ...   morally, most of us are taught to love instead of to hate. To
   respect others differences, and hold all life as sacred..>>

   If that is the case then how can 884.0  and this be explained ---> 
[..Walter White reported this incident by saying: "Mrs Turner (a black woman)
 who was in the eighth month of pregnancy, was tied together and she was
hung to a tree, head downward. Gasoline and oil from automobiles were thrown on 
her clothing and while she writhed in agony and the mob howled in glee, a match 
was applied and her clothes burned from her person. When this had been done and
while still alive, a knife, was taken and the woman's abdomen was cut open, the
infant, prematurely born, gave a feeble cry and then its head was crushed by a
member of the mob with his heels..] An account from a lynching scene. 
E/P Aug. '77 page 170.     
                      Jenefer Schute a white South African woman narrates:
[..My father had driven a friend to the airport and was long overdue getting 
home. The phone rang and, eavesdropping on my mothers's end, I gathered, with a
growing chill, that there had been an accident, that someone was badly hurt, no
someone had rather been killed. Then my mother's panicked tone suddenly shifted,
she shrugged, told my father to drive safely home, and hanging up turned to me 
with these words: "Dad just gave me the fright of my life. He told me  he'd 
run over somebody with the car, and for a moment I thought he meant A w-h-i-t-e
person."   ( Jenefer is currently teaching at Emerson College, Boston, Mass.)
                            [for verification of the account]
Besides the youngman who was recently killed in a New York City suburb for
being non-white in "our white neighborhood", there is a Montreal Gazette article
about 2 passengers in an auto accident. A reporter wrote:When the ambulance
arrived an injured black woman was left behind because the hospital & vehicle
were for ** blancs only**. By the time "hers" arrived she was dead - in RSA.  
  And all life is supposed to be sacred ?
 Let's forget about compuction for a moment and ask instead:
 An OPEN question: Does it have to take a tragedy ( like any of the above)
                   to discover our mortality ?
    
    ..auf Weidersehen..

re .31

>    Changing the way we think won't do squat. Take a walk in Central Park
>    on a moonless night and tell a mugger that you've changed the way you
>    think in the 10 seconds you have left in this world.

Our actions follow from our thoughts.  Changing the way we think
will change the way we perceive the world around us, and the way
we act.

If we are successful in changing the way we all think, not just me or you,
there won't be any muggers in Central Park any more.  I realize this seems
impossibly difficult, I never said it would be easy.  I believe there is a
process for changing our modes of thinking, and it begins with an individual
personal decision.

As to whether having changed the way I think will increase my chances
of survival, this is not as simple as it might appear.  Time magazine
recently reported that:

  "...the great bulk of expert opinion is that owning a gun undermines
   rather than increases safety..."

A study published in "The New England Journal of Medicine" (June 1986)
found that for each intruder killed with a firearm, 43 family members die
in gun-related accidents, homicides, and suicides.

- Peter

>Time magazine
>recently reported that:
>
>  "...the great bulk of expert opinion is that owning a gun undermines
>   rather than increases safety..."

 Without belaboring the gun control point too much, I would like to point out
that Time magazine has admitted to being less than impartial on the topic of
gun control.It is a journalistic policy of Time to only write pro-control
pieces, and to disallow the writing of purely factual pieces from which the
reader can arrive at their own conclusions. If anyone should happen to be 
interested, I can refer you to a copy of the letter written by Time to several
outraged editorial writers, which explains their policy.

 Now back to our regularly scheduled program...

 The Doctah

First of all, a brief intro...

    Michael Brennan
    ESDP - Hudson, NH
    
I have been in Read Only Mode for the last few months, due to the fact 
that my workload had increased quite a bit. The Stuart shootings and 
the resulting debates have stirred me so much that I felt compelled to comment.

Having lived in Boston and the immediate suburbs for the past 6 years,
and having the wonderful experience of being mugged ;-(, I felt that I 
had become somewhat "hardened" and jaded about what happened in mean 
sections of Boston. The Stuart incident forced me to realize how fast 
those walls came down. These murders, like the Tiffany Moore murder 
and the other killings, were all terrible tragedies. But the constant 
media bombardment on the Stuart case didn't give me a chance to ignore 
the story until it left the front pages. After several days, I ended 
up reading the news stories and I realized how innocent the victims 
were and how truly horrible the killing was.

    As a footnote, I want to add that it is my opinion that it was the
    fact that a white, middle-class, suburban couple that was hurt that
    has caused this enormous media coverage. This, in no way, diminishes
    any of these tragic shooting events that have happened in Boston over
    the last several months.

Did anyone read Charles Stuart's letter to his wife, or Carol Stuart's 
brother's eulogy? I found those to be touching, in both their
honesty and goodness. I couldn't help but note that both people asked 
for forgiveness for the murderer. Those two letters, more than any 
other media-diluted/sweetened hype made me realize that the Stuart family were 
truly wonderful people.

    At this point, I have several comments about the sudden calls for the 
    death penalty. Please hit NEXT UNSEEN if you do not wish to read any 
    more about this, or if any of the moderators feel that this is the
    wrong place for this discussion please move/delete.
    


My first point is about the call for the death penalty. I have a lot 
of problems with state sanctioned killings. I personally do not 
believe that most people who murder in situations like the Stuarts' 
are acting rationally. I don't think that the killer would have walked 
up to the car and then said to himself, "whatever I do, I'd better 
not kill these people, or else I myself might die", then proceed to 
flee once that he found out that the victims had no money.

In my opinion, these type of murders are committed by desperate people 
who are not going to weigh the abstract consequences (i.e., REALLY 
thinking about the possibility of dying themselves) before committing 
the crime. This in no way should diminish the courts' view of this
heinous offense. Once a person commits murder, they've crossed the 
line. This is an unforgivable offense. There is no rehabilitating a 
person, who has killed, to a point where they should be allowed to enjoy
the privileges of society. But, murdering them as consequence is out 
of the question, at least in my conscience.

But, as is with every incident in life, no situation is exactly the 
same. What if the person killed in self defense? What if the situation 
were such that the only way a person could defend innocent lives was 
to kill the perpetrator. Would these people deserve the death penalty?
Of course not. My point is that very few, if any, cases are open and
shut to the extent where there is ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT that the accused 
actually murdered the victim. As long as that person maintains his or 
her innocence and there are no 100% sure witnesses, there is no way to 
determine whether or not that person committed the murder. The "jury 
of his peers" system is the best method currently available to human 
beings to determine a person's guilt, but it is an atrocious method to 
determine a person's life on this planet. My opinion doesn't even
include all of the statistics that point to the conclusion that it is 
usually the people who can afford expensive counsel that get a "fair" 
shake from the justice system.

I do not see how the death penalty will reduce the murder rate, 
    especially in the drug and crime infested areas. Do I have a better 
idea with guaranteed results? No. But, I cannot sit on the sidelines 
on this one without raising the "what if"'s. The consequences might 
turn out to be as horrible as the crime was in the first place.

re .43

>                                                    I would like to point out
> that Time magazine has admitted to being less than impartial on the topic of
> gun control.It is a journalistic policy of Time to only write pro-control
> pieces, and to disallow the writing of purely factual pieces from which the
> reader can arrive at their own conclusions.

Having read the letter cited in .48 from which this conclusion is drawn,
I must say I saw it quite differently.  What I saw was a statement by the 
editors of Time magazine to the effect that they were no longer willing to
run editorials claiming the unrestricted availability of guns was not a danger
to public safety, due to the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.  This is
similar to rejecting editorials from the tobacco industry claiming cigarette
smoking is not harmful to your health.  In light of the public debate which
has already occured, and the overwhelming evidence that is now available,
the editors of Time magazine believe it would not be responsible to run such
editorials.

The claim that Time magazine has publicly admitted to being less than
impartial on the topic of gun control is the interpretation of
"The New Gun Week".

I leave it to the reader to decide which source has more credibility,
and/or a stronger vested interest with respect to reporting on this issue.

- Peter

 Thanks Pete. I really appreciate that.

    re .45:              

    > What I saw was a statement by the  editors of Time magazine to the
    > effect that they were no longer willing to run editorials claiming the
    > unrestricted availability of guns was not a danger to public safety,
    > due to the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.  

    I have a copy of the letter you refer to.  I believe that you
    mistakenly interpreted "editorial policy" as meaning 'policy about
    editorials' which it does not in the context it was used.  The letter
    was sent in response to criticism of a article that was run this past
    summer.  It WAS NOT PRESENTED as an editorial [true, it should have
    been].

    Time, Inc. turned People into their version of the National Inquirer
    and then turned Time into what People used to be: easy to read flashy
    stuff for the masses.

    - M

re .47

I think you are correct about "editorial policy" vs. policy toward
editorials.  Time clearly has adopted a view which favors some
restrictions on gun availability based on their reading of the
evidence with respect to gun availability and public safety.
Whether this makes them "less than impartial", that is, biased or unfair
in their reporting around the issue of gun related violence is harder to say.

Something in the nature of .43 struck me as unusually subtle and provocative.
I'm sorry if I misread your intent.

Getting back to the topic.  I was nearly moved to tears in reading the
letters from Carol Stuarts family.  They are such good people.  
It's hard not to feel the loss.

- Peter

>Time clearly has adopted a view which favors some
>restrictions on gun availability based on their reading of the
>evidence with respect to gun availability and public safety.

 Which is exactly why I stated that they will not allow purely factual pieces
which allow the reader to formulate their own conclusions. To me, that is
an indication of bias, no matter how quaintly and innocuously worded. For God's
sake, what do you think they pay her for?

 The Doctah

    I would take their editorial stance as ~We have examined bunches
    of evidence, and come to the following conclusion:  Blah, blah,
    blah.  You, dear reader, have now been warned of our possible
    bias, and should take it into account when reading our articles.~
    
    						Ann B.

>         <<< Note 884.50 by REGENT::BROOMHEAD "Don't panic -- yet." >>>
>                        -< Pre-judging, Mr. Levesque? >-

>    I would take their editorial stance as ~We have examined bunches
>    of evidence, and come to the following conclusion:  Blah, blah,
>    blah.  You, dear reader, have now been warned of our possible
>    bias, and should take it into account when reading our articles.~
    
 >   						Ann B.

I think the point here is that TIME has not made that statement publicly
but instead print a series of articles *AS NEWS ITEMS* that clearly
are an editorial point of view. any book or magazine or any other source
is welcome to publish their views *BUT* to pass off information
as some sort of gospel fact when it is not is wrong and biased.

I am not entering this to start yet another gun/no-gun topic, I do not believe
that was the intent of The Doctah either. What I read in his replies
and what I am stating catagoricly is
"there is more evidence that supports gun ownership than supports the anti-
gun position". It is only the misrepresentation of facts in the media that has 
led to the public perception that firearms are a "danger".

The world-renowned CATO institute in Washington has published a paper
recently entitled (paraphrased here) Trust the people, the case *AGAINST* gun 
control, why gun control doesn't work" The Senate commitee on Justice 
published a paper a while ago and declared antigun laws unConstitutional,
The Rossi study, the Paxton Quigly book all support and publish true facts
yet TIME has chosen to go with hype. When I get my own copy of the CATO report
I will enter or mail parts to anyone who wishes.

This country can no longer allow the media to decide what is right or wrong,
it is their job to publish news as news or editorials as editorials.

Amos

Please - no more discussion of gun control here.  This conference is not
the proper place for it.

Thanks for your anticipated cooperation.

			Steve

>    I would take their editorial stance as ~We have examined bunches
>    of evidence, and come to the following conclusion:  Blah, blah,
>    blah.  You, dear reader, have now been warned of our possible
>    bias, and should take it into account when reading our articles.~

 Ann, I would be inclined to agree with you if they had printed the contents
of that letter in Time magazine, especially in close proximity to the articles 
in question. However, not only was their editorial policy not published, but
efforts to publish Time's stance in other media have been met with lawsuits.
Why, for God's sake, would any magazine with integrity object to publication  of
their editorial policy? Why would they deny that the letters were ever sent 
(until confronted with them)? It does not take a detective to figure out that
something less than honest is occurring here.

 As for my intentions, I fully intended and expected to prevent this type of 
topic degenration. As it turns out, I erred in not specifically requiring
that Mr. Sichel not further the rathole before allowing him to view the letter
I referenced (which was a pain in the butt to find). Rest assured, this type
of error will not recur.

 Now we have experienced exactly what I attempted to avoid. Needless to say,
I'm thrilled (as are most participants about now).

 Sign me-

 Disillusioned

    
    	I am of the tendency to agree with .52. I asked that this note
    be put in to discuss feelings towards victims of violent crimes.
    Not to discuss the methods of stopping or detering said crimes.
    I would like to ask that if you wish to discuss gun control or 
    other deterents to please go to another topic, or discuss with the
    monitor(s) about starting a topic of your own. I thank you for your
    cooperation.
    
    AK_

 MONTREAL: (AP) - A young rifleman invaded the Univ. de Montreal engineering
 school on Wednesday (about 5:20 pm EST) and singled out females for his targets
 killing 14 women and wounding 12 people before committing suicide.
 Montreal Police Director Claude St. Laurent said the killer, clad in hunting
 outfit, rushed into a packed classroom in the 2nd floor and yelled,
 "You're all a bunch of feminists" before beginning his murderous rampage.
 Witnesses said he divided the students in the classroom by sex and sent the men
 into the corridor before opening fire on the women.
 Six women were shot dead in that room, and a seventh in another room. The man
 carrying what looked like a .22-caliber rifle, left in search of more victims.
 The gunman prowled the halls, killing three women in the cafeteria and four 
 more women in the corridor of the third floor, where he shot himself.
 Re: *One police officer who was called to the scene found out his daughter was
 among the dead.
     One male student said a bullet passed his leg and he brought his hands up
 in a pleading gesture, the gunman left him alone. Student Francois Bordeleau  
 said he had to drag people by the collar to keep them from going in the man's
 direction. "Who could have thought that something like this could happen in a 
 peaceful student world" said Ba Madou, 35 an engineering student.
 At the Montreal General Hospital Doug Lemm, assistant director of security,
 said the hospital's staff were at a Christmas party in the cafeteria when the
 first victims began to arrive. He said the timing could not have been more 
 fortunate. "The party was scheduled from 3pm to 8pm and there *was no booze.
 We called all the doctors and nurses to the operating room at once."
                                      (Dec. 7th 189 - Ref. Montreal Gazette)
    Can you believe this..?         
    

I can't bring myself to believe it....

Since I heard this story on the radio...  I've wondered how this could happen.
How someone could be so twisted/deranged/crazy/* to do this; wondering how
they got that way;  wondering how the male students could stand by and let
this happen, how the female students could let it happen...

Jim.

RE:< Note 884.56 by WILARD::BARANSKI "Neomaniac on the loose!" >
                         -< our world has holes in it >-

>I can't bring myself to believe it....

>  wondering how the male students could stand by and let
>this happen, how the female students could let it happen...


I haven't read every reply in this and other conferences so it may have been
asked and answered, but this question (how the male students could stand by)
has me baffled.  If it were 1 person against this guy it would certainly be
tough to overcome him...but a classroom with many men? It seems like all the
reports I've read, the men watched most of this happen.

Maybe if it were me in the same circumstance I would react differently, I 
don't know..but couldn't they have *tried* to stop it?


Jim

         Not knowing the whole situation, we can't condemn anyone for not
    acting.  It would be hard to estimate how I would react in the presence
    of an armed lunatic.  Also, not knowing for SURE that anyone would be
    killed might make many people less apt to be a hero.
    
                                          Greg

    RE: .59
    >> not knowing for SURE that anyone would be
    >> killed might make many people less apt to be a hero.
    
    Agreed! The previous couple replies were in need of a fix
    
    christopher

     If I didn't have a little one and a couple of teenagers and a wife,
    I'd sure be alot less concerned with self-preservation. Since I have
    people that depend on me, emotionally, financially, and logistically, I
    can't be quite as reckless as in years past. I don't know what I'd do.
    
     The Doctah

    I think the men would have been more likely to help if there were less
    of them.  There have been many many studies of helping behavior,
    prompted by a murder in New York, where a woman was
    beaten for two hours in a courtyard and no-one called the police. 
    Since no-one felt personal responsibility for helping, no help at all
    was offerred.  Furthermore, I think law enforcement professionals would
    not suggest heroic tactics against a hell-bent assassin armed to the
    teeth.  I think your denouncement of the men in that situation is
    uncharacteristically unfair.
                                      -Brian

I did not intend to denounce anyone..I meant that the accounts that *I*
personally read offered no explanation as to the men's actions, which led
me to wonder what they could have done, if anything.


Jim

>	Why hasn't anyone suggested that the women could have taken
>    action against Mr Lepine?
    
         Jim did.  Look at the last line of .56.
    
                                   Greg

    
    I think shock may have had some bearing on the minds of these people.
    It is not a normal occurance to have a "rambo styled" man come charging
    into the classroom divide it by sex and commit a free for all.  I am in
    the mind frame that it would be unfair to pre-judge the men who were
    there. The shock effect of the incident is probably traumatizing
    enough. It would not suprise me if many of them feel like they should
    have done something now that they can look upon the incident with a
    much clearer frame of mind.
    
    Debbi

    I think the answer to your question Mike is that people (men and women)
    still picture men in a "rambo" sorta light.  We almost expected them to
    try ANYTHING.  They didnt, I cannot judge them, nor can I judge the
    women for not trying anything themselves.  The smart money, although
    lives were still lost, was to do as commanded.  
    
    We all would like to think that we would try to save innocent persons,
    but when a situation like this confronts us, smarts usually overrides
    the "i should ahs" everytime.  I feel for the families, and the men
    that witnessed this horror.
    
    AL

RE:  >>  .. studies prompted by a murder in New York, where a woman was
  >>.. beaten for two hours in a courtyard and no-one called the police. 
    
 
 In 1964 a woman named Kitty Genovese was murdered outside her home in New York
 City in the early hours of the morning. Her assailant took an hour to kill her
 and her screams were heard by at least thirty-eight of her neighbors. 
 These neighbors watched the entire scene from their windows, but not one of 
 them came to her aid or even bothered to call the police. Their behavior is
 an example of a fairly common tendency - the reluctance of people to 
 "get hands dirty/knees bruised" in the problems of others under certain 
 circumstances.  
                 Re: 62 - Were you referring to this.... (above) ?  
      Anyone with some of the results of the studies mentioned in note #62. ? 
    
    Re:884.58 >> ..perhaps the male students were..(?)...by their peers >>
    
                              How ?
    
    Re:884.57 >> ...but couldn't they have *tried* to help ..? >>   
    
    An unanswerable question ..?              

    >             Re: 62 - Were you referring to this.... (above) ?  
    >  Anyone with some of the results of the studies mentioned in note #62. ? 
    
    Yes, that is exactly the case that I was thinking of.  I thought  it
    was Kitty Genovese, but deleted it off my note because I wasn't sure.
    
    I don't have the helping behaviour studies easily available.  But I do
    remember from my psychology classes that you are more likely to get
    help from a lone person than a crowd.  My point is simply that we
    should not judge the men on the scene too harshly, and I think there is
    general agreement on that.
    
    -Brian

    
    
    	I just heard on the radio this morning as I was coming in that
    Charles Stewart, the husband of the pregnant woman that was shot and
    killed in Boston last October, jumped to his death this morning off of
    the Tobin Bridge in Boston.
    
    	I can't even begin to identify the feelings that I have regarding
    this entire tragic story. The grief, the despair, the anguish....
    
    	What truely sad news this was.
    
    
    

    That is awful, I feel very sad for what that poor guy has had to go
    through.  They should charge the person responsible for the 1st two 
    murders for the murder of his life as well!  

    
    In another conference it was just announced that his car was found with
    a letter in it saying he shot his wife and himself.
    
    At least the killer got what he deserved - life for a life....my
    stomach is churning like mad and I am shaking.  What a perpetrated hoax
    it turned into.
    
    I feel sorry for the citizens of Roxbury who were harrassed
    unnecessarily for this man's action.
    
    D.

    
    
    	What is the other conference? I'd like to find out more
    information. I realize that newly breaking news is sometimes inaccurate
    so I am trying to not make a judgement yet, but this is indeed a
    horrible  situation.
    
    

    >.2 
    	I am not sure who you think died.  It was not the killer but
    the victim STEWARD who committed suicide I believe.
    	I also think that his suicide is going to be used by the defense
    to disallow the identification he made of the killer.
    	Anyone know for sure if that is possible.

    Re: .2
    
    I just heard the same, he left a note and he admitted to
    killing his pregnant wife.  Your right, he got what he deserved! He
    even had the balls to pick another person out in a line-up.
    

    
    
    	my apologies for the wrong name, does anyone know how to edit the
    title?
    
    

    re -1:
    
    Notes> 938.0
    
    Notes> modify note/title="modified title"
    
    You can change the title of your own note at will...
    
    					andrew
    

    Well, I'm home sick with the flu (have been almost all week), and 
    a special news report live from the scene, just came on news center 5.

    Here is the sketchy details:

    So far there is no body recovered.  The police are assuming it is
    Stuart, but are also leaving room that it could be an another person
    who helped with the murder, OR even a dummy.

    Stuart Automobile was found in the northbound lane of the bridge with
    his drivers license and a suicide note.  Eyewitnesses saw something or
    someone go off the bridge. 

    Yesterday, Stuart became a suspect, when a family member went to
    the DA with some sort of details, and at that point the focus switched to
    Stuart.

    Police searched the parents home from midnight to 3am this morning, and
    are now searching a home in Revere, looking for a murder weapon.

    There will be a news conference at noon today.

I moved replies .71 through .79 from a separate note to here, where the
Stuarts' (not Stewart nor Steward) story was being told.

			Steve

    From Newman Flanigan, the DA:

    search still continues, both in the Charles River, and in a body of
    water in Revere, looking for both a body, and a weapon.

    A secret grand jury had been called, A number of individuals were
    called and questioned from 8pm to 2am yesterday/today. During that
    time they stopped and went to see a certain body of water in Revere,
    and started a search of it. 

    Attempts were made to locate Stuart last night, but they were
    unsuccessful.  Media, not Flanigan, has said Bennet was the suspect.

    No more comments will be made to be fair to the grand jury. There was
    no comments made on questions about who fired, or motive. They believe
    the story Stuart told them in not true.

    The suicide note was a hand written note about 4 or 5 lines long, that
    stated he could not handle the allegations.

    The suicide is still being investigated.. it still can be a hoax, they
    are also searching the airport (in fact the conference was from Logan)


    From Jerome Cronin, the police officer first on hand...  

    He found a Black Nissen (type - missed it sorry), on the lower level of
    the bridge.  On the passenger side was the license and the note.
    He then looked into the water, and about 100 yards out saw what he
    thought to be a human body bobbing in the water.

    There is much being said about this crime and what happened last night.
    
    What concerns me a lot is how the media is controlling our thoughts and
    emotions.
    
    The media took a story of a young family that seemed to have everything
    going for them and gave extensive coverage to their misfortunes.  There
    were other stories that day and that week.  There were other people
    that died violently.  We did not mourn their deaths, we did not grab on
    to the accounts of their funeral services.
    
    Many people viewed this as a condemnation of the black community.  It 
    certainly gave some people the opportunity to make racist comments and
    slurs.
    
    There are rumors that Charles Stuart was involved in drugs.  It could
    very well have been that someone from the comfortable white suburbs was
    using the urban neighborhood as a means of extra income.
    
    I wrote something in this note about how I felt when I heard the news. 
    I live in Boston and I know how hard my neighbors are trying to fight
    crime.  The news broadcasts of the recorded 911 call from Charles
    Stuart really bothered me.
    
    Right now I feel that this story was brought to my attention and I
    spent energy and prayers for a family that may have needed that but
    no more so then the young man that was shot in Roxbury the very same
    day and I can't even remember his name!
                                                               

    There was also a story in the Herald this morning that an unidentified
    man left a taxicab and jumped from the Tobin Bridge.

    
    Unfortunately the media cares so much about ratings the sens of the
    story gets lost in the drama.  In a pressure to blame someone the
    police went on a wild chase and quite possibly - unneccessarily
    upheaved the Roxbury community.  
    
    It does stink of racism from the fact that Stuart did pick out someone
    from a lineup. But no racism against the black community. Racism
    against others who were different.
    
    It seemed the perfect scapegoat with all the previous happenings in
    Roxbury to blame it on someone from the area.
    
    Debbi
    
    P.S. I hate live funareal coverages.....rating grabbers if anything
    else. Let the families mourn without being on live tv.
    

    I think the fact that there has not been an arrest made in this case
    indicates the police have been doing a thorough job and were *not*
    influenced by the extensive media coverage.
    
    Obviously they knew enough to realize that there was something wrong
    with the story.

    To get back to the subject of "feelings for victims" for a moment:
    
     According to the "Boston Globe", there were 100 murders committed in
    Boston (and metro area) in 1989.  Can you name any 5 of them, other
    than the Stuart woman?
    
     Neither can I.
    
    					Nigel

    Charles Stuart the husband and father of unborn baby Stuart is
    missing, he left his car and a suicide note on the Tobin bridge.
    He confessed to shooting himself, and to killing his wife.  His brother
    tipped police in this matter.  The police are not sure he jumped
    or tossed a dummy over the bridge, they are searching the air port
    for him. They think he has been involved in drugs. Motive for the murder 
    is insurance money.
    

    According to a local radio station (106.3FM), Stuart's body was
    pulled out of the river.
    
    Sad, sad story.......

I moved replies .87 and .88 from yet another separate note.

	Steve

From another news conference (4:40pm)- the last one that Flanigan said he would 
give:

Again sketchy details, I copied as fast as I could...

Flanigan read from a prepared statement and took no questions because the 
grand jury is still sitting.

He confirmed that the man found in the harbor beneath the Mystic River 
Bridge was indeed that of Charles Stuart, and that the cause of death was 
drowning.  He also confirmed that a spent bullet was removed from his 
body, the same bullet that was known to be in his body while he was in the 
hospital.

Last night, a bother of Charles Stuart (Perin? something) called the 
assistant DA saying he had some information concerning Ms Stuart and his 
brothers case.  They then met with the DA, and several members then gave 
the DA statements.

They also gave the DA Ms Staurts engagement Ring {why is this important?}
he then took out a warrant for Staurts arrest, but they were unable to 
locate him.

Drivers at the Dizzy Bridge in Revere, have recovered several articles 
personal and clothing that belonged to Ms Stuart from the river there.

    By the by, in the news reports I watched, Stuart's suicide note
    did *NOT* contain any confession that he killed his wife. The note
    said that he was anguished by the fact that he was now considered
    the prime suspect by the police.
    
    --- jerry

    RE .90
    
    The engagement ring was important because it was originally listed as
    stolen by the person who shot the Stuarts.

Stuart Take Fatal Leap; was suspect in slayings.
Worcester Telegram and Gazette, January 5, 1990.

Charles Stuart nationally known as the suburban victim of a 
shooting that also killed his pregnant wife as they left an 
inner-city childbirth class, drowned himself yesterday after 
learning he was a suspect in the case.

He was identified as a suspect by a brother who knew an innocent 
man was being targeted.

Stuart, whose newborn son died 17 days after the October 23rd 
shooting, flung himself in to Boston Harbor 300 feet below from a 
bridge hours after what prosecutors called a dramatic disclosure 
that swung the investigation toward Stuart.

Suffolk County District Attorney Newman Flanagan said one if 
Stuart's brothers had come forward and convinced investigators 
that Stuart's story that he and his wife were the victims of a 
black assailant "is not true".

John Perenyi, attorney for Matthew Stuart, 23, said his client 
had been telling people about his suspicions since the shooting 
and that he came to the lawyer in early December.

BAG PASSED

Matthew Stuart said that on the night of the shooting his brother 
asked him to meet him near the hospital and that he would pass a 
bag to him through the car window.  He said he took the bag which 
included a nickel-plated snubnosed revolver.

When asked if Matthew saw Carol Stuart, Perenyi said: "Matthew 
did not expect to see her and did not see her.  But he thought he 
saw something in the front seat of his brother's car."

Perenyi said "it would seem to have been inevitable that Chuck 
had to have been shot at that time."

A search of the Pines River in Stuart's hometown of Revere 
yesterday turned up the bag in question, which contained a Gucci 
bag, wallet, makeup, and other belongings of Carol Stuart.  The 
gun, which Matthew said was disposed of separately, is still 
missing.

No arrest warrant had been issued prior to Stuart's disappearance 
, and attempts by police to find him early yesterday were 
unsuccessful.  But, Flanagan said, "I would assume he could very 
well have been aware of it (having become a suspect).:

He said the case is still active.

The attack on the suburban  couple, who had been married four 
years, drew national cries of outrage about city violence.  
Numerous media outlets name a city man with a long record, 
William Bennett, as a suspect.  He had never been charged, and 
the prosecutors cleared his name yesterday.

Perenyi said Matthew Stuart disclosed the events of the night to 
Perenyi when it appeared that Charles Stuart had identified 
Bennett as the assailant.

"He didn't think it right for Mr. Bennett going to trial on a 
murder one indictments," Perenyi said.

Perenyi said Matthew had no explanation for the crime. "He didn't 
think his brother was into gambling, drinking or other women."

Rumors of Stuart's possible involvement had circulated in the 
Boston area for weeks.  The speculation included talk that he and 
his wife had never been in a birthing class and that there was a 
large insurance policy on Mrs. Stuart.  prosecutors said 
yesterday they had no evidence either rumor was true, and Perenyi 
said Matthew knew nothing of a large policy.

Police said Stuart's car was found about 7:00 a.m. on the lower 
level of the Tobin Bridge.  A handwritten note of four or five 
sentences and Stuart's license were found in the car.  Police 
divers found the body about six hours later, and drowning was 
given as the cause of death.

As a stunned city and suburbs turned to radios and television for 
details of the case, father of Stuart's wife, Giusto DiMaiti was 
rushed to Mass General with an undisclosed ailment.  He was 
treated and released.

The Stuart case gained national attention after police released a 
tape recording of Stuart's anguished pleas for help on the 
telephone in Carol Stuart's car.  He had suffered a stomach wound 
and his 30-year-old wife, an attorney, lay dying.

He left the hospital to be at his son's side at his death.  And 
he wrote a statement for his wife's funeral in which he said 
"...for us to truly believe, we must know that (God's) will was 
done and that there was some right in this meanest of acts. In 
our souls, we must forgive this sinner because he would too."

Shortly before Christmas, Stuart viewed a lineup containing an 
alleged suspect and while officials refused to say whether an 
identification was made, many media outlets said Stuart had 
indicated that Bennett, who was in the lineup, could be the 
assailant.

    the joke is on us.....
    
    
    jp

.94>    the joke is on us.....

    	'Joke' is *not* a word I'd choose to describe this whole
    situation.

    	amy

    Hardly a joke dearie...
    
    But really, this guy was such a sleaze that he actually had us 
    believing his whole story.   Granted the police didn't tell
    us everything, and obviously their speculations weren't vocalized
    due to the severity of the situation...
    
    It's too bad that Charlie was so racist as to assume he could
    put the rap on "an average height black man in a running suit".
    
    What a creep he was to use a stereotype in such a way.  You can't
    blame the Roxbury community for getting angry, but the one
    they should be angry at is now dead.  In my opinion, if a 
    victim gave a description like that you'd go after someone
    with a related record who fit the description.  I am sure
    the man they arrested pleaded guilty because his legal council
    told him to  - - to possibly lessen the sentence.
    
    I actually getting sick of hearing about it...we'll probably
    never get the REAL story...
    
    it's  like "Who shot JFK???" -- -- it's all reduced to speculation.
    
    what a disgusting world we live in....
    
    
    jp

Of course, I now feel obligated to point out that it is the media, once again,
that is telling us that Charles Stuart was a "sleaze".  Why believe them
now any more than we did before?  Maybe in a month we'll find out that
his brother really did it, or that it was a UFO alien, or that it was all
a dream (ala "Dallas"), or ...

				Steve

 Thank you, Steve. It is not accurate to say that Charles Stuart murdered his
wife, even though it looks like that is the case. It could indeed turn out to be 
the brother who pulled the trigger. The media (as usual) is spoon feeding us
their speculations as to what happened (veiled in language that makes it
appear to be fact.) The media's actions are not that much above the actual
crimes committed in this case, in terms of morality. The media hasn't apologized
to the black community, even though they were the single largest contributor
to the racial tensions aside from the police. The latest actions by the media
(reporting their NEW and possibly improved speculations) show that they haven't
learned lesson one about unbiased reporting. That we as a people continue to
swallow such sensationalism is disturbing indeed.

 The Doctah

    Much like a jury must do, I think we must read the facts, listen
    to the conjectures and them form our own opinions. Unfortunately
    all to many people are willing to take what is spoon fed to them
    by the media as truth.
    
    Gail
    
    ps. But I have like Mike Barnacles "observations" in the Globe lately.

    Hmmmmmmm...reminds me of a story about a woman, a man, a baby and 
    a dingo!!!
    
    The media will do just about anything for a story.  Don't always 
    believe what you read.  
    
    The only time I knew the Oz media to refrain was in a case a couple of
    years ago - the murder of Anita Cobby.  Point one, the media.
    
    ...dale
    

    This may not be exactly what this topic was created for, but my
    feelings for the victim drastically changed as this story unfolded:
    
    Last week a 24 year old woman was stabbed to death in her home.  The
    coroners report stated that she had over 130 stab wounds over her
    entire body and her sister that found her, in her home, stated that she
    did not recognize her because she had also been stabbed in her face,
    repeatedly.  She and her husband had just celebrated their 1 year
    wedding anniversary the day before her sister found her.  I thought
    "how awful, they had only been married a year and she was so young." 
    They should the funeral, and the church communion the Sunday after they
    buried her, etc, on tv and talked about how bereaved the family was,
    etc.  Yesterday they arrested her 26 year old husband for her death. 
    Now my thoughts are "How could he do that and then attend the funeral
    and let people hug him and tell him how sorry they were, etc."  I have
    also heard that the killer gave the dead woman a shower after stabbing
    her, but before the police were called.  How sick can people be???

    The Carol DiMatti Scholarship Foundation has been set up by the DiMatti
    family.  It is their wish that she be remembered in a meaningful and
    positive way.  These scholarships will be awarded to students from the
    Mission Hill High School.
    
    At last something positive out of a horrible situation.  They are to be
    commended for their thoughtfulness.  Their action has done a great deal
    to heal the wounds in the Mission Hill community.
    
    

        RE: 884.1 by PENUTS::   
.1> I think that this one touches me more becuase the media has allowed us
    to get very close to the reality >               
                                  
     RE:884.100 by SNOC01::
    >> The media will do just about anything for a story. Don't always
          believe what you read.>


Joyce, will you agree that we feel for those that we are conditioned to feel
for - based on local biases ? OR is it the media (an abstract thing) which
    tells us who we should feel for ?  (This is only a rhetorical question)
               
               OR ?
False perceptions are enhanced by STEREOTYPES. A stereotype is an oversimplified
generalization that emphasizes only selected qualities of another group.
It tends to evoke a generalized reaction to any member of that group. To some
extent stereotypes *arise out of a tendency to SAVE TIME and EFFORT. As one
author points out, "It is much easier to have a definite opinion as to the type
of creatures women are, and behave accordingly than, to analyze and study each
woman anew."  What is signigifant in a stereotype of a <group> is that the sel-
-ected qualities tend to be those that emphasize differences from the dominants
thus serving as a "reason" for differential treatment. The psuedo-intellectual
assumption is that these qualities are innate and therefore the biased 
treatment of <group XYZ> is deserved.  
Since NEWSPAPERS and MAGAZINES and other forms of *mass communication depend
on popular approval for their sales, they often serve as reinforcing agents in
the maintenance and *continuance of such generalized popular stereotypes. 
                Example: The man chuck stuart.
His prejudices develop with regard to any given important social stereotype that
impinges on his enviroment. (Relative to where he is) It may be the "locals"
of colonial Indonesia, or the Francos of Canada, the "coloreds" of R.S.A or
the "Oriental immigrants" in the Pacific regions, or the "'Harijans" of India,
the Gypsies in Romania, the Jews in Nazi Germany, or Polynesians in N/Zealand.
Some societies seem to produce fewer of this type of personality, while other
societies seem to produce more of this type of prejudicial personality.
[Pages 54/55  - Gladys Meyer, Colmbia Univ, and Charles Marden, Rutgers Uviv.]

  
           ANOTHER  FORM of BIAS in the MEDIA.
Take another example. Someone from Scotland (Gt.Bt.) had observed that
when the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) reports  events, they use
"British, Scottish, English - differently. 
When a Scottish person does something GOOD - the BBC reporters refer to the
individual as British ( meaning ALL of us). When another British person does
something BAD who happens to be Scottish the BBC reporters will say "John Doe"
the Scotsman/Scottish. When a person who happens to be English does something 
bad the reporters refer to the individual as British (we are all imperfect).
BUT if someone does something good who happens to be English then the BBC 
reporters refer to the individual as ENGLISH - (meaning not just a British but
an ANGLO-British)


BTW: Does anyone know what the current amount is ?  I'am speaking of the
Carol DiMaiti Fund. The last time I heard it had risen to $209,000.00.
Some reports mentioned that prisoners from MCI Suffolk(?) or so have 
contributed. Is that a fact or is it some form of "media" hype ?
    
 FaZari.

    In answer to .104 I believe the media supported our bias and
    stereotypes.  I think many people were relieved to think that they were
    right.  The city is dangerous and the people that inhabit the city do
    bad things.
    
    And now we have a very dangerous city.  The 22nd murder occured last
    night.  A young man was looking out his bedroom window to determine what
    was causing the noise and confusion in the alley.  He was shot in the
    forehead.   Something I have done many times in the same neighborhood.
    
    We have all ended up victims some more than others.
    
    

    Re:105 
    
    .> I believe the media supported our bias and stereotypes. I think many
    .> people were relieved to think that they were right.
    
    I was under the impression that it was the other way around. Wrong ?
        
    .> Something I have done many times...
    
      Are you saying you've been doing the same thing ? Like,as the Romans do?    
      I recently read  a newspaper article about how travellers in Rome's
      trains are waking up from  unusual deep slumbers, to find most of their  
      possessions gone - ( the crooks release sleeping gas thru' the
      ventilation pipes.)   It's not funny !
    
      
       The Scholarship Fund, how much has accumulated so far ? D'you know ?

    I am not sure what you want me to say.  I think that the media knew
    this was a hot story because of the racial issues and the bias that the
    suburban community has against the city.  I think the media exploited
    that.  And it worked people bought newspapers and watched news
    broadcasts.  
    
    This example concerns me in that I worry how my opinions are formed in
    other situations.  Especially political elections.
    
    I often look out my bedroom window to see what is going on in my alley.
    I made the comment to illustrate that I was concerned that I might be 
    a victim of crime.  
    
    There was another homicide last night in East Boston.  This is about 6
    miles from my home.
    
    The Carol DiMatti Stuart Scholarship drive has exceeded $326,000.00 if
    memory serves me correct.

>    I think that the media knew
>    this was a hot story because of the racial issues and the bias that the
>    suburban community has against the city.
    
    I don't think that was the key. It seems like everyone who a) is black
    or b) lives in the city feels that this story would have been back
    page, 1 paragraph fodder except that the alleged perpetrator was black
    and the victims were white. I cannot accept that. It was a big story
    even before the race of the alleged attacker was revealed. I remember
    the night the story broke vividly. The 30 second blurbs before the
    news. The initial news stories- I watched two of them on the 11 o'clock
    news, and neither indicated the race of the perp. And it was already a
    major story. Given the lack of other noteworthy events at the time, the
    fact that the story was followed up on is not especially surprising.
    
     The Doctah

    
    	Just something I've been picking up about all the murders in
    	Boston this year. Just to show the media's bias, every murder
    	that was commited with a gun has made that fact graphically
    	known up front. Yet, when some other weapon is used, it is
    	not until the end of the sotry, if at all, as in some cases,
    	that that fact is brought out. When the media is on it's
    	anti-gun kick (most of the time) this is painfully clear.
    
    	G_B
    

    I said the bias the suburban community has against the city.  I have
    lived in the city for 7 years.  I have friends (?) that have never
    visited my home because they are afraid of the city.  The racial issue
    was almost sublimineal.  Most people know where Brigham and Women's is
    and the who the majority of the residents are.
    
    If a young, up and coming couple from suburbia had been attending a
    birthing class in Concord and a similar crime committed it would never
    have received the press it did.
    
    And I agree with George's comment.  The press does report things in a
    way that delivers the message they want us to hear.  A lot of people 
    want to hear that the crime was committed with a gun!

    RE: 107 & 110
    
    Joyce, thanks for the update on the scholarship fund.
    I agree with most of your observations -> in .107 & .110
     

    My information was incorrect...it is $264,000.

"The smart money, although lives were still lost, was to do as commanded.".68 

If what you are betting is that 'some people might get killed, but it probably
won't be me', I agree with you.  However, that would not be my concern in the
situation.  If a maniac walks into a classroom, and starts dividing it up, and
nothing is being done to stop it, I would bet heavily that someone was going to
die.  I'd much rather die trying to stop that then die without a fight, or
stand by and watch other people die.

Not only didn't anybody try to jump the maniac, but it doesn't sound like
anybody even tried to talk him out...

I don't suppose anyone ever heard anything further on this?

Jim.