Brandt stop asking the questions even though she was told that she wouldn't of been responsible for anything that could of happened to the victim, she still decided not to continue. Brandt was faced against helping/saving her victim or was to continue the experiment unlike in "Gang rape raises questions about bystanders' role " Brandt decided not to continue. In the gang rape article, it said no one called the police to help a 15-year-old girl from being raped. Brandt stopped in the middle of the experiment because she was worried about her victim. She knew that the victim had a heart condition and stopped for the sake of his own life, she was confronted by someone suffering and did exactly what she needed to do.
One incident happened in California about a block away from a high school. At the high school near by the scene was filled with hundreds of students and faculty. "Outside in a dimly lit alley where the victim was allegedly raped, police say witnesses took photos. Other laughed " came and even joined in on the act. No one called the police until hours later ("Gang rapes raises questions about bystanders' role "). This is a perfect example of how people become bystander apathy because they don't do anything until hours later or when it's too late. Witnesses took photos and laughed while a poor girl was being raped, some even joined. Several claimed that they didn't want to get involved. The bystanders in this gang rape are just like some of the other subjects in "Perils of Obedience " experiments. Many of the subjects in that experiment continued to ask the questions unlike Brandt who refused to continue further. The Police said that in this gang rape witnesses actually joined in on raping a 15-year-old girl. the police said some to took and laughed. The witnesses who claimed that they "didn't wan want to get involved " got involved by not doing anything. People just stood and watched a 15-year-old be raped right in front of them when all they needed to do was leave the situation and call 9-1-1.