Kitty Genovese Case Study

752 Words4 Pages
The murder of Kitty Genovese took place on March 13th, 1964 outside of her apartment building in New York. She was attacked three separate times by Winston Moseley, the perpetrator. This particular murder got headline news due to the witnesses of the murder and what was done to intervene.The New York Times were a huge part of the headlines due to their original article written about the murder, which was said to be fabricated for attention purposes. The article claimed that 37-38 people were eye witnesses to the murder during the three different attacks, but no one decided to report the crime to the police which definitely raised some eyebrows. It was discovered many years later that only a few people actually witnessed the attacks and there were even claims that two people did call the police, but there were no logs of the calls. As a result, the New York Times, the residents near the attack and the police received mass criticism for being responsible for the murder of Kitty. The question remaining for everyone following this case is “Who is or isn't responsible”. The witnesses who didn't call should not be held responsible due to the bystander effect and diffusion of responsibility presented by Professor Mahzarin Banaji. While most people immediately turn their heads to the witnesses of the events to blame or…show more content…
The murder of Kitty should not lead to blame and pointing fingers in this situation, it should lead to a higher sense of community and finding a way to prevent murders in any city. Professor Mahzarin Banaji provides a very relevant point of the bystander effect and the diffusion of responsibility, explaining why many people didn't do anything or report it. Due to these two psychological circumstances, the witnesses who didn't report the events should not be held responsible for Ms. Genovese’s
Open Document