A bomb exploded at the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta, Georgia, killing one and wounding more than 100. The FBI conducted an investigation and within days, Richard Jewell was identified as a suspect. After several months, the Justice Department announced that Jewell was no longer a suspect. Jewell was publicly scorned, and followed incessantly by the media and law enforcement for the three months that he was believed to be the bomber. Evidence in the case was interpreted in such a way as to support the idea that Jewell was guilty. For example, Jewell was known to have seen the bag containing the bomb before it detonated, and moved people from the area. This life- saving act was seen as evidence that he was the bomber, because the investigators believed that he had planted the bomb in order to be able to be seen as a hero for saving people. The tendency to ignore contrary evidence or overstate existing evidence when investigators believe they have identified the guilty party is a likely practice of

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

This scenario illustrates the tendency to ignore contrary evidence or overstate existing evidence, which aligns with utilitarianism. Utilitarians focus on the outcomes of actions, and in this case, investigators might have been motivated by the desire to quickly solve the case and prevent further harm, leading them to focus on evidence that supported their theory and ignore evidence to the contrary. This approach is not characteristic of religious ethicists, the ethics of care, or ethical formalists, which have different focuses and principles guiding their ethical reasoning.

A Bomb Exploded at the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta