Found Cash: What Would You Do?

Last week, some highway workers in Indiana found over $130,000 stashed in a tire on the side of the road. When they realized that they encountered cash and not trash, they contacted the Indiana State Police. The authorities stated that they would attempt to find the rightful owner of the money, which may become property of the US government if unclaimed. The workers who discovered the money apparently don't get a piece of their find, and were simply praised for their "honesty and integrity."

This story led me to wonder what I would do if I stumbled on a large sum of money. My immediate thoughts were of greed: if no one was around, and it looked like it was sitting there for some time, why not? Who would know? But as I continued to think about it, the more the moral side of my conscience spoke to me. Turning the money into the authorities, just as those highway workers did, is the only right thing to do. I'm a believer in Karma, so claiming something that isn't mine would only curse me twofold. I suspect that I would be tormented by the guilt and paranoia that would come with stealing such a discovery, and I know that I would not be able to tolerate it.

The Roman poet Ovid once said, "Men do not value a good deed unless it brings a reward." Well in a situation like this one, peace of mind would be enough reward.

When Being A Good Samaritan Goes Wrong

If in passing you saw a stranger who needed help, and you were the only one around, would you stop to assist? What if a friend were in danger, would you risk your life to save him/her? Most people would probably take the initiative to aid someone in crisis.

Such was the case for Lisa Torti, a 30-year old Las Vegan, who in 2004 rescued a friend from the wreckage of a major car accident in California. Sadly, today that friend is a paraplegic, supposedly as a result of Lisa pulling her from the car 4 years ago.

This week, California passed a ruling that would allow Torti's friend, Alexandra Van Horn, to sue her for allegedly causing her paralysis. Torti claims that following the accident she saw smoke and thought the car was about to explode, and therefore rushed to get Van Horn out of the car. Van Horn argues that there was no imminent danger, that Torti acted recklessly, and that she should have instead called the proper professionals to assist.

Good Samaritan laws have been established to protect from liability those who come to the aid of others. There are stipulations, however, such as the principle of imminent peril, which applies to the Torti/Van Horn case - cause of hurt or injury can make a rescuer liable if there is not evidence of imminent danger, according to this principle. The problem is, such as the case of Torti, how can you defend your own judgment for "imminent peril"? Torti acted with urgency in an attempt to save her friend from a situation that she saw as certain death. In my eyes, this is a good deed that should not be challenged, nor have any consequence. If my life was in jeopardy, I would sure hope that friends, family, or even strangers would reach out to help.

This is a really unfortunate story. What's even more troubling is that with this ruling, people are going to now think twice before acting on their good samaritan instincts.