This paper will be covering the topic of whether or not it is ethical to allow criminals to make monetary gains from the retelling of their crimes and lives through books and films. There is much debate on this topic as well as laws prohibiting criminals from profiting off of their crimes. There are several different methods used to retell the criminal’s story. The two most popular methods are through the use of film and books. Typically, these books are well received by critics and audiences alike.
The USA has put into effect the “Son of Sam” law that stems from the 1970s serial killer David Berkowitz attempt at selling his story to several different publishing and film agencies at the time. The “Son of Sam” law prohibits criminals from profiting …show more content…
The problem with the positive reception of the films and books about these criminals and their crimes is that it begins to paint the criminal in a sort of positive light such as in the Wolf of Wall Street. Jordan Belfort stole many people’s life savings and left them financially ruined, but now he has a huge blockbuster movie and best-selling book to his name while some of his victims remain financially ruined. Or take for example the story of Henry Hill a convicted murderer, his movie Goodfellas is a classic loved by many film aficionados. The movie does depict some of the heinous crimes that Hill committed, but at the same time it paints him as someone who is just living by the scraps that they were given and are doing what they do as a means to provide for their families. The books and films provide us with a misrepresentation of the criminal and their crimes they paint an unrealistic picture of the criminal for audiences to …show more content…
I feel that it is unfair to the innocent victim(s) and their families to see the perpetrator making money or acquiring assets while they are still struggling with the crimes committed against them. All though the retelling of some of these crimes allows us to learn from them, I believe it is disrespectful to the victims in many different ways. One way I view this as disrespectful is by means of invasion of privacy. Perhaps the victims do not want the crimes committed against them being brought to light of the fact that it could be humiliating or for fear of backlash from the rest of the world seeing as how some may actually blame the victim for the crime committed against them. I also do not think it is fair for these criminals to gain a sort of celebrity status from their crimes and using this new found status to their advantage by hosting public events or doing interviews with media and news agencies. Why should these criminals be allowed to profit from all the bad they did? Instead they need to pay for their crimes and make their victims whole
The USA has put into effect the “Son of Sam” law that stems from the 1970s serial killer David Berkowitz attempt at selling his story to several different publishing and film agencies at the time. The “Son of Sam” law prohibits criminals from profiting …show more content…
The problem with the positive reception of the films and books about these criminals and their crimes is that it begins to paint the criminal in a sort of positive light such as in the Wolf of Wall Street. Jordan Belfort stole many people’s life savings and left them financially ruined, but now he has a huge blockbuster movie and best-selling book to his name while some of his victims remain financially ruined. Or take for example the story of Henry Hill a convicted murderer, his movie Goodfellas is a classic loved by many film aficionados. The movie does depict some of the heinous crimes that Hill committed, but at the same time it paints him as someone who is just living by the scraps that they were given and are doing what they do as a means to provide for their families. The books and films provide us with a misrepresentation of the criminal and their crimes they paint an unrealistic picture of the criminal for audiences to …show more content…
I feel that it is unfair to the innocent victim(s) and their families to see the perpetrator making money or acquiring assets while they are still struggling with the crimes committed against them. All though the retelling of some of these crimes allows us to learn from them, I believe it is disrespectful to the victims in many different ways. One way I view this as disrespectful is by means of invasion of privacy. Perhaps the victims do not want the crimes committed against them being brought to light of the fact that it could be humiliating or for fear of backlash from the rest of the world seeing as how some may actually blame the victim for the crime committed against them. I also do not think it is fair for these criminals to gain a sort of celebrity status from their crimes and using this new found status to their advantage by hosting public events or doing interviews with media and news agencies. Why should these criminals be allowed to profit from all the bad they did? Instead they need to pay for their crimes and make their victims whole