This article is about two long time friends Nick Chavin and Robert Durst. Mr. Durst’s wife Kathleen and his neighbor were both murdered in the past and no one was ever prosecuted for the deaths. Mr. Chavin came to the defense of his friend thinking that he could never kill his wife or his neighbor. Years later the two had dinner together because Chavin wanted to talk about the two women that were killed. Before leaving, Mr. Durst said to Nick Chavin, “I had to do it, it was her or me.” That is all that was said before the two parted ways and it was then that NIck Chavin knew his friend was a murderer. Even though they had been friends for a very long time, 72 year old Chavin knew he had to bring this back to court.
Tying this story in with Glaucon’s idea that people will do bad things if they don’t think they will get caught I think it is obvious that Mr. Durst killed his wife and neighbor thinking that he wouldn’t get caught and he got away with it for a long time. I mentioned the speeding in traffic example in class and it’s situations like that why I agree with Glaucon’s theory. As for Mr. Chavin, I think that it must have been really hard for him to turn in a long time friend for such a serious accusation. But he felt that it was the right thing to do maybe not for his friend, but for the two people and their families that had passed. That goes along with consequentialism. I think that people think consequentially everyday when making decisions. Before we act, we usually think about the consequences of those actions to determine what the best decision would be and I’m sure Mr. Chavin thought about the consequence of losing a long time friend before turning him in for murder.