Interesting question. To my knowledge, I have never heard of somebody who got off the hook so to speak in a legal manner by blaming an outside influence like a movie/book etc. Some people, who were judged irresponsible of the crimes commited because of a mental illness that twisted their reality to a point where they did not know what was right and wrong anymore, might evoke an influence from a movie/book etc but even then it has never been directly linked as the direct cause of a crime from what I know. If I remember correctly, the people who cited Natural Born Killers as an influence for their crimes ended up in prison and the movie itself was never established as the cause of their crimes, even though Oliver Stone was "judged" partly responsible by some trashy tabloids and simplistic media people. Another example would be Marilyn Manson who was severely critizized following the Columbine massacre if I remember correctly, but again he was never legally blamed I believe for his albums and songs and nor should he.
Personally, I think only the creators of a propaganda movie which would directly incite people to heinous actions could, and probably should be judged partially responsible for subsequent crimes, but even then the responsibility will always return to the person who committed the crime for me, no matter how you turn it around (except if the person who committed the crime truly did not know what he/she was doing at the time). Fact is, a lot of criminals know what they are doing, know that it is wrong but yet they do it anyway, and no film/book/tv show or work of art in general is responsible for that.
Bill Foster: I'm the bad guy?...How did that happen?
reply
share