I just received an email from Jay about the latest development in the murder of Abhijit Mahato, a DBD PhD student at Duke University:
Durham police say a late-night chase into Wake County on Tuesday led to the arrest of four people responsible for at least one recent armed robbery near the Duke University campus, one of whom is now charged with murder in connection with a previous robbery.
The arrests of William Dozia Smith, 20, Stephen Lavance Oates Jr., 19, and two juveniles, both 14, may bring investigators a step closer to solving some of the more than 70 robberies that have been committed since Jan. 1. The spate of robberies — many preying on Hispanics and often involving handguns — prompted Durham CrimeStoppers on Wednesday to increase its reward offer to $5,000 for information leading to arrests.
Smith, Oates and the two juveniles were charged with robbery with a dangerous weapon and felony fleeing to elude. They are accused of robbing a couple at gunpoint at an apartment on Lambeth Circle late Sunday and may be suspects in other, similar armed robberies including a second incident just hours prior at the Poplar West Apartments, also near the Duke campus.
Oates was later charged with murder and robbery with a dangerous weapon in the Friday slaying of Abhijit Mahato at his apartment at 1600 Anderson Street, Apt. C-2, police said in a news release tonight. And he was also charged with robbery and simple assault related to a Nov. 19 armed robbery at the Bennett Pointe Grill on Hillsborough Road. [News&Observer]
After reading over 300 comments on the original thread about this tragedy, I know that many of you were especially moved by this story; we’ll do our best to keep you informed.
For those of you near Duke, a funeral service will be held this Sunday morning, at 10:30 a.m., by The Hindu Society of North Carolina. ABD, DBD, bespectacled or not, I think the one thing we can all agree to do is to keep Abhijit and his family in our thoughts and prayers.
Was Abhijit the first casualty in this crime spree? Good to see that the Durham police seem to have got results quickly, unlike in the LSU murders.
?!!
What Rahul said. Let’s not rush to judgment (not that anyone is–just want to hopefully head off a crazy turn in the comments), but–good news!!
Bittersweet news indeed. I now wonder what went through the children’s heads when they decided to snuff out this man’s life. Anyways let the speculation begin!
70 Robberies since Jan 1? Isnt that a lot. It is very much possible a lot of the victims never reported the crimes to the police. BUt some would have. They should have been patrolling that area a lot more. Does anyone know if any notices were given warning the public about a trend of robbing Latinos in that area? If they didn’t find this foursome by accident, I wonder how long the cops would have been clueless. Another month?
And those mofos were not children. 14 is old enough for them to fry in my opinion. They shot an unarmed person. It wasn’t a case of the 14 year olds panicking. They just killed the guy in cold blood because they got their kicks that way. They killed other unarmed victims too. The effort it would take into reforming these mofos could be used to rescue 20 potential muggers from becoming criminals.
I agree with Pravin in post 5. Those “kids” are old enough to know right from wrong. Hope the killers are thrown in jail for life with no parole but that probably won’t happen.
I could be wrong, but from my reading of ANNA’s post, Oates (age 19) is the only one charged with murder.
Please let’s not let the conversation devolve into an argument over whether you should try 14 year olds as adults or the death penalty, especially since it sounds like they’re connected with robbery, not murder.
Were there other murders? I thought it was 70 armed robberies and one murder, but perhaps I’m misreading?
I’m glad this case is heading towards the right direction. But I have a little bit of sympathy for the suspects too. 14, even 20, is a very young age to get involved in a murder and robbery scenario.
Shlok (#8), thank you for being a voice of reason. I feel terrible, terrible beyond words for Abhijit and his family, but let’s not turn this into a public stoning of the accused. What they did is incredibly serious and heartbreaking, yes, and I’d be in hell if they were my kids. But about 14 being “old enough to know right from wrong” — I don’t know. 14-year-olds are usually naïve and immature and impressionable. I know I was at that age, but I grew up in a culture that valued nerdiness above all else. Nobody had guns, and our worst transgressions were, well (to bring in another post), reading Mills & Boon romances, or, at worst, sneaking off to meet members of the opposite sex at the library (yes, the library) on the weekends. But it’s all circumstance, isn’t it? Some of us are lucky enough to grow up in healthy, positive environments, and some of us aren’t. Please, let’s remember that victims and criminals — they’re all somebody’s kids.
Can the author of this post please explain the last sentence?
Horrendous crimes, plunging friends and family into grief, are committed for money. Some years ago, I read of a New Yorker forced to part with his bank card and reveal its pin number, before being fatally shot. The robbers were two students he had been mentoring; they were quickly apprehended. One cannot be too careful.
I go back and forth on this, with loss of life, from a judicial and essentially moral point of view, I believe equal punishment can be meted out. However, from a practical point of view, how much of it is actually preventative?
I agree; that is one reason that child soldiers make effective killers (numerous studies on civil strife have found this); they have very little conscience and are relatively more likely to follow orders to please superiors. Also this is one reason that the marines (and the army) try to recruit students straight out of high school (though I am not implying that both are on equal normative footing; just noting the fact)…
Are you asking if severe punishment has a deterrent effect? I am not sure about the meaning of the last sentence. If that is you question, there is a lot of work happening in that area. This paper, which I liked and which was my most recent read on the subject, was co-authored by two respected scholars, one of who was pro-capital punishment, and the other one was anti-cp.
Is Capital Punishment Morally Required? The Relevance of Life-Life Tradeoffs
Are you asking if severe punishment has a deterrent effect?
That’s what I was asking.
potential error, irreversibility, arbitrariness, and racial skew because the world of homicide suffers from those same problems in even more acute form.
I agree for the most part with the quote, but not this part. It’s clear which race is disproportionately disenfranchised by the judiciary process, and capital punishment by extension. but is it enough of a disparity in the capital punishment world to outweigh the deterrent effects? Not sure.
Even looking at it from an aggregate POV, states that have the death penalty, eg texas, nc, virginia, etc.. don’t necessarily have lower murder rates.
I am glad that the perps were apprehended. And my condolences to the family of Abhijit. I cannot fathom the horror faced by his family that is so far away. BUT I hope we dont descend into such medieval cries to ‘fry’ these juveniles. I dont buy that the death penalty deters murders. A person committing a violent crime is obviously not in a state of mind that is weighing the ramifications of his actions.
Condolences to Abhijit’s family & friends. A needless loss of life. When law enforcement produces results quickly (accidental/deliberate), it not only provides some measure of comfort to the family, but has an significant impact in the neighborhood. This ought to be backed up by education within the university system and, among folks that may have grown up not trusting law enforcement, that any crime should be reported.
Well forget the minors. The fact is this group has committed other murders. This is not a spur of the moment panicky killing. If we have a perfect society, then we can look at utopian ways of reforming killers. But there is a younger generation that could use some of that attention to reduce the likelihood of future killers. That’s my philosophy anyway.
Just to clarify, I only emphasized the fact they were children to point to the greater fundamental issue at hand: what kind of backwards environment are these kids growing up in? With that being said, I don’t believe it is necessary to view them as minors where the law is concerned. I throw my vote for the chair.
The killing of desi grad students in the last few weeks got me thinking of my own days of slumming it. And I don’t use that word lightly. I stayed in dump for some six months, before on-campus housing opened up. The house was at the edge of the Univ. Cincinnati campus – not a neighborhood I would walk through if given a choice.
I agree that universities must do more to secure student housing. I would even argue that universities should subsidize better housing for grad students, or increse their stipends/assistantships etc. That said, here is the paradox… most grad students finish their degrees and get well paying jobs. Why don’t they monetize those future earnings earlier and pay for better, safer housing?
I can think of a reason I didn’t borrow from relatives, other than that conservative work ethic of not going into debt. Which is stupid, because debt seems much less important than personal safety.
Any thoughts?
10 · Radman said
The last thread about this murder disintegrated in to an unfortunate “conversation” which was essentially stereotypes about first generation and second generation desis being shoved back and forth, with qualifiers. I was directly addressing that. It does not matter whether someone looked “meek” or not, a life was lost, so conjecture about how to address crime (as to whether DBDs should arm themselves with guns, whether it’s better to fight back than comply with robbers, etc) was out of place on a thread which will possibly be visited by members of Abhijit’s family or his friends. No disrespect was intended.
They also said Oates, of 2302 Anthony Drive, is charged with other robberies dating back to November, in which many victims are Hispanic.
What is your source for this claim?
I think the SM commenters do care deeply about what’s happened to Abhijit Mahato. Some identify with him. It’s too bad it devolved into a DBD vs ABD debate. Though some of the comments were insensitive, I can’t help but think it’s due to wanting to understand and prevent what happened to Abhijit.
Liberal compassion rears its ugly head. The first question in liberal minds is to as “is Capital punishment morally required” while people concerned with truth what culture and values produces such violent individuals.
Bess, I agree. I know it was done out of frustration on behalf of or sympathy towards Abhijit, but I think even a commenter on that thread said that they would feel bad if the victim’s F/F read some of that. Let’s have a collective NYR to be more sensitive in 2008. 🙂 People (especially those who are related to a victim of a violent crime) find these threads years after we debate our way through them; I think we all forget that while typing, which is understandable.
Liberal compassionates are not people concerned with truth? This sounds more like deja poo all over again.
Ha Ha Ha.. Nerds: Who They Are and Why We Need More of Them
I goofed big time. I reread that article. For some reason, I thought they committed other murders. Sorry guys.
15 · HMF said
HMF, the theorists claim that it is black people whose lives are not being valued appropriately if we fail to mete out capital punishment if it has a deterrent effect. Since black people happen have a greater vulnerability to be victims of violence (by other black persons even, when we fail to punish the perpetrators in way that has the maximum deterrent effect, we are endangering the lives of those innocent/non-violent black persons whose death could have been avoided. So the authors are saying that if we care about black people’s lives, we should re-examine the effectiveness of deploying capital punishment as a deterrent. According to the empirical evidence in this paper, many more black lives will be saved if capital punishment is meted out to murderers. Obviously, the authors are not arguing that we should punish people without the most robust evidence – “Death penalty = more lives saved in the future.” Others can still point to normative reasons as to why we should not have capital punishment, regardless of the lives it saves. The authors do address some such arguments in the paper, particularly why the state is a different kind of moral agent. You and I may not kill murderers, but a state can. I don’t have the time to go into this, but those interested in why the state is a special kind of moral agent can read the paper.
25 · Deja vu all over again said
Ah, I see being “liberal” automatically denies you access to “The Truth.” I do not see how an empirical study about the efficacy of capital punishment equals “ugly liberal compassion.” If anything, a study indicating that capital punishment is effective, contradicts the standard (non-consequentialist) garden-variety American liberal’s anti-capital punishment position. Then again, I can’t help your Pavlovian response to the phrase, “Is Capital punishment morally required?” In this case, people were generally curious about this question, and looking for hard evidence. But, of course, they are documented liberals, they must have an ulterior motive. Down with the liberals! Nobody dare install a gay-black-transgender-anti-life-anti-gun-latte-swilling-aura-reading-dread-head-prius-driving-yuppie in the White House. Not on your watch. Indeed, deja vu all over again 🙂
1 · Rahul said
Yes, true.
You and I may not kill murderers, but a state can.
but when a state has shown a clear history of errored biased information, even when a “robust” case is built, and it happens to disproportionately affect certain people, then the author’s argument has holes in it.
A state can be a moral agent, however, when that happens to be one of the united state, then any such morality will have a tint to it.
But he said racism is more acute in the world of homicide, which I don’t agree with, the entire concept of institutional racism is just that, application at a state & institutional level, that is unachievable at a personal level (ie I can’t just kill person A because they’re so and so, or I can, but have to face dire consequences) A state can wrongfully execute someone and who’s ultimately accountable is not known. And we know who it affects more.
sorry, HMF, it wasn’t clear from the post, but I was summarizing the authors’ POV. i actually haven’t thought about the state as a moral agent or how different it is from individual actors (that it is different seems to be obvious according to my intuitions) and what sort of powers it gets and what justifies its monopoly on violence. i have some views in this matter, but not enough to have a coherent framework. i agree with you that the state is biased in the way it acts wrt certain groups, although the authors claim that one way to counter this bias (against the groups you mention) is to enforce capital punishment so that violence and crime can be reduced. such an action would actually have greater benefit for blacks taken together; although, of course, it will not address the causes of violence, only change the incentives which make violent crime attractive to people. and the problem regarding sketchy evidence is a real issue for those who are pro-capital punishment. second, you are right about the various potential acts of discrimination that taint the judicial process (biased juries, inadequate legal defense for the poor etc etc). those are definitely very legitimate concerns, but if in a particular case, we could be convinced that the in fact the evidence is incontrovertible, then c-p may be an option. i am not committed to it either way, although i am sure deterrence would figure in my moral calculus. i do care about future deaths as a result of violent crime. i also care that the criminal “pay the price” for her actions, to the extent that she is responsible for it. but c-p and its morality is a big and fascinating question, and requires a lot of thought before i can make firm commitments to any stand(s).
but if in a particular case, we could be convinced that the in fact the evidence is incontrovertible, then c-p may be an option.
I agree with you here, especially when the assailant shows no sense of remorse or compunction. (ie the al qaeda guy who claimed he was right and he won, then 2 days later filed an appeal saying, ‘oh your system might be kinda ok’)
portmanteau, the recent papers about the deterrent effects of capital punishment could make a very compelling case for it, if they are shown to be sound (I personally believe that retribution should not be a reason for capital punishment, so the only argument would be a utilitarian one like Sunstein et al make). The problem is that I think the number of executions, paroles, pardons etc. is relatively small compared to the total number of sentenced criminals to be able to make a statistically significant comparison, and even their papers have such low threshold numbers as 9, probably as an artifact of the current low numbers. I think other people have made this statistical argument to question the conclusion, for example, here.
This claim is very tenuous scientifically, and the discussion of adolescent brain processes, impulse control, and their notion of responsibility was quite central to the entire Roper v. Simmons case. A more extensive article on the justice implications of neurobiology is here.
34 · portmanteau said
Complicated sentence 🙂 but you are right – the U.S. govt kills black people disproportionately and black people are the victims of capital crimes disproportionately. While your inquiry is valid and complex, don’t these questions become irrelevant, if the bottomline question of the failure of capital punishment as a deterrent to capital crime, has been settled years ago? Other than Islamic states, India & China, there are a handful of outliers who don’t buy this broken connection, none in the league of the U.S.
A good picture of capital punishment, with exigencies.
14 should not be old enough to be tried as an adult; Rahul is right about teenage brain development. The 19-yo and the 20-yo legally are, even if they are young, but you know what, most violent criminals are young, most likely because they either get thrown in jail or killed eventually. I’m also kind of stunned that they committed 70+ robberies in less than a month- perhaps what someone suggested in the last thread about them targeting Latinos because they’re less likely to go to the cops applies here? Also, I don’t have opinions about the death penalty one way or the other, but I’m kind of surprised by the calls of sympathy for the robbers and the murderer. Not that I advocate a ‘Fry them!’ mentality, I agree that nothing is ever so black-and-white, but I feel like the calls for understanding are often selectively applied (by people all over the political spectrum). Besides, doesn’t anyone believe in good old-fashioned retribution nowadays?
Nala (#40):
Are you for real? I’m not sure why I’m even typing this response since I’m all but speechless right now, but I suppose it is to say that I thought the principle point of human progress was to move past “good old-fashioned retribution.” And you say you “agree that nothing is ever so black-and-white” and therefore do not advocate a “Fry them!” mentality, but if you do see that nothing is ever black-and-white, how then could you be against any calls for understanding? If you feel these calls for sympathy and understanding are “selectively applied” — I, for one, don’t think I apply them selectively, and I think everyone would benefit from being able to put themselves in the shoes of so-called “monsters” — then isn’t the solution to apply them consistently, rather than not to apply them at all? It really sounds as if you’re saying we shouldn’t preach understanding and sympathy for anyone because sometimes we don’t preach it where it is deserved. Is that what you’re saying? If so, your argument makes negative sense to me. As in, less than zero sense.
Um, I was being partly tongue-in-cheek with that comment. And by ‘retribution’ I didn’t mean the death penalty, I meant punishment in general, I see that that was unclear. I hope you don’t have a problem with punishing criminals in general? Though for many people it would mean the death penalty, if that criminal has taken another person’s life. I’m not sure I would say that it is antithetical to human progress; I was taught that Hammurabi’s Code was a step forward for humankind in that it institutionalized human nature.
I’m not against calls for understanding, I’m against the selective application of them to suit anyone’s political agenda. But that doesn’t really belong on this thread, apologies for bringing it up. And of course no one believes that they are selective in their application of it, everyone would like to believe that they’ve got it all figured out (and that includes me). I also never made any references to ‘monsters’ – I believe that many criminals start out as scared little boys. But if they can be held legally responsible for their actions, then they should be.
retribution, in this context, means “paying the price” of your crime, ie for violating the rules of the legal system you’re bound to, not “revenge” in the common way we use it. it is (the state’s/leviathan’s responsibility to punish those who transgress the law), according to some theorists, a necessity for a rights-based political and property-ownership legal system to work, otherwise the most powerful would exploit the weakest and violate rights (imagine a scenario where people basically stake a claim to whatever is in their power to hold on to because only someone more powerful can you can dislodge you). how this system of rules comes about or who has the monopoly of violence or how we become signatories of the social contract or property owners is filled in differently by different folks. this is a very simplified version, but i have to rush and i’m an amateur anyway. where is camille, when you need her? correct me if i’m wrong, nala, or misrepresenting you.
whoops, sorry nala, i didn’t see your comment. it took me that long to post 🙂
correct – i’m not advocating vigilante action, but punishment by the state of convicted criminals. i’m being honest here – i don’t understand what makes the death penalty that much worse than life imprisonment, for someone who has been charged with murder.
I hope you don’t have a problem with punishing criminals in general?
I don’t. And this might sound outrageous, but I believe in cases of willfull, ending of life, the family of the deceased should have most of, if not all say in what that punishment is, but I’m open to other forms of punishment – ie, if the family wants him to stay in jail for rest of life, or only eat green M&Ms for the rest of his life, or whatever the family of the deceased decides.
death penalty that much worse than life imprisonment, for someone who has been charged with murder.
life imprisonment is rarely that, with appeals up the wazoo. and of course there’s always the chance of evidence at some point arriving that reverses the decision.
i’m opposed to CP for epistemological reasons. you can’t know everything with certainty and if you make a mistake you can’t correct it. this puts an annoying nuance in my otherwise consistent pro-death (abortion, assisted suicide, war) stand.
Then just take the accused, force him in the military, and send him to whatever country the US is trying to “liberate” at that time.
48 · Manju said
that is the most beautifully written objection to the death penalty i’ve heard in recent times. very parsimonious 🙂