Superheroes, Bandits, and Cyber-nerds: Exploring the History and Contemporary Development of the Vigilante

• Author: Stephanie Juliano
• Position: Touro Law School
• Pages: 44-64







 !

44

Superheroes, Bandits, and Cyber-nerds: Exploring the History and

Contemporary Development of the Vigilante

Stephanie Juliano

Touro Law School

sjuliano@tourolaw.edu

Abstract: This article will first discuss what defines a vigilante, the history of vigilantes,

and the contemporary vigilante’s effect on the lega l system as a whole. Also, this article will focus

on those scenarios that bring an ordinary person to react in an illegal way to a perceived

injustice. In focusing on these scenarios, this article will examine a little more closely the answers

of deeper questions about the na ture of law and justice, and their ro les in the accelerating world

of new media.

1. Introduction

The average person has at the very least an understanding o f what he or she considers justice. Regardless of how

an individual’s vie w of justice fits into the constructs o f law, the motivation behind this view is based primarily

in matters of morality, sculpte d from societal and familial influence.

1

From these outside influences, individuals

conceptualize justice a s “personal justice,” the idea that justice for me is justice for all. Laws are created based

on the theory that society shares a collective personal justice, one which, ho wever, is not without conflict.

2

The

concept of personal justice is represented in our legal system by the jur y, where defendants have an opportunity

to be judged by a panel of their peers. In Tayler v. Louisian a, the Court stated that “the purpose of a jury is to

guard against the exercise of arbitrary power to make available the common sense judgment of the co mmunity as

a hedge against the overzealous or mistaken prosecutor . . . This prophylactic vehicle is not provided if the jur y

pool is made up of only special segments of the populace.”

3

A j ury, theoretically, is to make a “common sense

judgment of the community,” but this statement does not encapsulate every factor a jury must consider during

decision making, and in fact, only alludes to the one factor the law is meant to uphold—justice. Impliedly, if a

jury were not to consider its idea of justice in its decisio n, then emphasis on diversity would not be an important

factor in picking a jury. The jury system is supposed to ensure that what society at large (represented by a small

and diverse sample o f as ma ny as t welve peo ple) can a gree is “justice” i s factored into the j ury’s decision to

mitigate corruption in the legal system. However, a jury is not free to decide cases simply based on a collective

sense of justice, but must adhere to the law and guidelines of the court. Where a jury strictly adheres to the law

and disregards justice, even where the law is clearly insufficient, a void forms that must be filled by the

vigilante.

When discussing the concept of personal justice, it is impossible for one to dismiss the vigilante. The

timeless mixture of an incontrovertible sense of justice, superheroic self-reliance, and human flaw speaks

volumes to our culture’s awareness of the inconsistencies present in even the best governing systems. The idea

of the citizen taking the law in to his or her own hands has gained popularity in recent years. One need only look

to any number of contemporary vehicles for the vigilant citizen theme, from movies li ke “The Dark Knight,” to

television dramas like “The Shield,” and even to reality television series like “To Catch a Predator” to realize its

appeal. I n fact, real li fe “superheroes” have organized a number of registries online. One registry,

www.reallifesuperheroes.org, provides some insight into the run-of-the-mill superhero’s life. These are citizens

inspired by the caped crusaders of comic book fame, dedicated to making the world a better place. The website

1

John Rawls, A Theory of Justice 7 (The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1971).

2

Jon Mandle, Rawl’s A Theory of Justice: An Introduction 12(Cambridge University Press, 2009).

3

Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522, 531, 95 S.Ct. 692, 698 (1975).







 !

45

includes a FAQ section that explains their operation from “What is a real life superhero?” to “Why do you wear

costumes?”

4

The website also provides a list of active and retired superheroes, and even a c reed, which states:

We are Real Life Superheroes.

We follow and uphold the law.

We fight for what is right.

We help those in need.

We are role models.

We will be positive and inspirational.

We hold ourselves to a higher standard.

Through our actions we will create a better brighter tomorrow.

5

However, the Real Life Superheroes claim that they are not vigilantes b ecause this group operates, sometimes in

the gray area of the law, but within the confines of the law none-the -less.

Crime fighters exist in other forms that do not require spandex bodysuits a nd capes. A simple Internet search

will uncover thousands of users who have at some point tak en it upon themselves to step into the gray margins of

the law in an effort to right perceived wrongs. Globalization a nd the rampant spread and development of

technology have introduced several new challenges in the application and enforcement of law; questions of

jurisdiction, ethics, and cultural divides have plagued efforts to regulate the Internet.

6

The anonymit y and

relative safety of the Internet embolden people with a hidden courage to stand up to injustices in a way they may

fear doing in the real world.

7

In most of these cases, the citizens do not break the law, and therefore probably

cannot be titled vigilantes. These citizens follow the law, however, not because they want to, but because they

have to, which is a symptom of a greater issue. When a system, for example local communities or federal

government, is well-controlled and fairl y controlled, the populace tends to support and protect the status quo and

seek justice through the proper channels (the police or the courts).

8

However, when a system is imbalanced, it

causes an up rise within the system, enough to compel a citizen to marginalize or completely forego legal

recourse in an attempt to achieve justice.

9

Historically, there has always bee n a need for vigilantes. When American colo nists felt the British

government was taxing them unfairly, people began to smuggle goods and destroy ship ments. The British

government refused to bend to the will of the people, an d this situation catalyzed the American Revolution,

which ultimately the colonists won, forever removing their colonies from Britis h rule.

10

Similarly, when

desperadoes plagued the western frontier, society began to change its code of conduct from a mandatory duty to

retreat when faced with conflict to allowing handguns and confrontatio n during a fight, even if the fight resulted

in death. Case law from the late 1 9

th

century reflects this position, and in one case stated that a man “needed to

retreat no further than ‘the air at his back.’”

11

These decisions would be the saving grace that kept the posses o f

vigilante enforcers loyal to the government and its laws.

4

http://reallifesuperheroes.org/faq

5

http://reallifesuperheroes.org/rlsh-creed

6

Jack Goldsmith & Tim Wu, Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World viii-ix (Oxford University Press,

Inc. 2006).

7

http://people.dsv.su.se/~jpalme/society/anonymity.html

8

Rawls, supra, at 352.

9

Id.

10

http://law.jrank.org/pages/11129/Vigilantism.html

11

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Old_West#cite_note-131