James Holmes Alleged Shooter Was Seeing A Psychiatrist Specialist in Schizophrenia
Dr. Lynne Fenton, the director of student mental health services at the University of Colorado and a medical school professor appears to have been seeing Holmes prior to his carefully planned and horribly executed rampage to kill. Holmes was a first-year graduate student in a neuroscience Ph.D. program, and he had just withdrawn from the program without completing it.
12 died and 59 were injured in Holmes’ mass shooting inside a crowded movie theatre in Colorado a week ago. Holmes apparently sent his notebook to Dr. Fenton, his lawyers claimed in motions to the court Friday. The notebook is said (by rumor since none of the media has seen it) stick figure drawings depicting a mass killing, but it remains unclear when the notebook reached the university, seeming to have sat in the mail room not having been delivered to its addressee.
Holmes’ lawyers from the public defender’s office
1. asked the judge to find out who leaked information to the media about the notebook and its contents,
2. arguing that Holmes’ privacy and constitutional rights have been violated.
I can hear the howls of outrage about Holmes’ privacy and constitutional rights. The dead, including a child, a father of two children, young people just starting in life, had no privacy nor constititutional rights from Holmes after he shot them and they lay dying on a dirty and bloodsoaked theatre floor.
But, there will be due process for Holmes. In likely the narrowest sense of the laws of the land, he will be given what he gave none of his victims. An actual long set of daily chances to defend himself.
As I understand the notebook situation, the officers had two different warrants to search and seize, and that Holmes told them about the notebook himself, and Holmes’ told the officers also about his mailing of it to a certain person at U of Colo, Anschutz Campus.
Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold and Cho at Virginia Tech all had their notebooks too… and made videos of themselves telling of their intensely disturbed states of mind, and what they wanted to do. It is sometimes forgotten that at Columbine the computer video teacher and the English teacher both brought Klebold’s and Harris’ papers and videos submitted in class, to the principal for the teachers were so distressed by their contents. Even then, it was seemingly ineffectively brushed away. Sometimes it is forgotten that teachers at Virginia Tech also asserted that Cho was a disruption to the class and seemingly not well. But, it was seemingly also brushed aside.
People often speak of others ‘snapping.’ But, that is not likely in deep mental and unmedicated illnesses such as paranoid schizophrenia. Often the illness is long in deepening from early adolescence onward, a brain/ brain chemical deviation it appears. It becomes more and more apparent as the person’s delusions grow greater and greater and negative and unwarranted projections are cast over others who then ‘must be punished’ in order for ‘purifying others’ or purifying self, or ‘purifiying the world from evil’ that only the homicidal (and often suicidal) see.
Remembering a delusion has a basis in fact, but a grandiose distortion of its meaning that is not concommitant with consensual reality.
Just for a moment, a pretend scenario through the eyes/mind of a person with delusions: Thereby, move theatre runs films showing people in heroic and in depraved situations. True. They are films. True. But delusional person decides movie theatre is the hole in the earth through which Satan rises into the world, and all who go to films must be stopped or ‘saved.’… by killing them.
From 4 decades of work with persons in varying states of grief, sorrow, remorse, broken heart… and early on my internships with those who suffered from various psychoses, I can say that the former group represent a garden variety in a way– of humans just struggling to find and live in true self again. But, the latter group have serious mental disorders that distort reality, making the person unstable in terms of moral conscience, and sadly often leading to self harm that is permanent, and sometimes grave harm to others.
We do have medicines that control most psychotic symptoms. One of the most pressing issues is, will the person with a hallucinatory or delusional mental illness be compliant in taking their medication if there is no adult to supervise them? Sadly, the answer is, sometimes not to often not. Which puts the not well person at risk, and sometimes, those around them as well.
CODA
Dr. Estés is a practicing psychoanalyst and post trauma specialist who worked at Columbine High School and community for three years after the massacre, and also worked with Victims’ Assistance on both east and west coasts to help assist survivor families of the 9-11 bombings of the Trade Centers. She is currently on mission teaching post-trauma recovery protocol to citizen helpers and healers in the many communities affected by sudden homelessness, loss of animals and possessions, in the five major forest fires that blackened the skies in so much of Colorado and burnt over 100,000 acres of wildlife land to the ground in the last many weeks. Her post-trauma protocol is used throughout the world, most recently in Norway after the shootings, in Queensland after the massive earthquake, and in Japan in the aftermath of the tsunami.
Share This
Thanks for the insights, dr. e.
Dr. E. you are a great source of information for those of us trying to understand all this. I remember a psychiatrist making a plea to the television audience, after one of these episodes, probably Cho, that if anyone out there has thoughts that they can’t control, to please, please, contact a professional and they would get help – no questions asked. I’d never seen that before. Maybe we need mental health messages on a regular basis.
It’s my understanding that someone in a prolonged psychotic state, could actually spend a large amount of time purchasing ingredients for making bombs, and buying weapons to carry out a delusional and horrendously conceived attack. But I’m also struck by the fact that, unlike so many sociopaths , who may commit suicide after their crimes as a way to assert their final act of defiance by preventing any personal accountability, Mr. Holmes not only did NOT kill himself, but, he also warned the authorities that his apartment was booby trapped.
These actions are inconsistent with the acts of a monster, and, Dr. Estes is probably correct to present this sad case as typical of mental illness. It is tragic that Mr Holmes did not comprehend the magnitude and deadly results of his actions, because when overwhelmed by a delusional state, his mind probably had some sort of self-justifying reason to do what he did. Holmes may have been immature and a loner, and, there is no way to dismiss the incredible violence of his actions, but I think that the inherent drama characteristic in media coverage, all too quickly sensationalizes reality when describing people like Holmes as the epitome of all evil, or the right hand of Satan, etc.
Of course what he did was horrible and there is no way to ignore that fact! But perhaps we should quit being so quick to limit our perception of a mentally ill person as being nothing but a monster.
Hopefully some day we will have effective medications without debilitating side-effects that can prevent this kind of tragedy.
Of course Mr. Holmes will be given due process and his rights will be respected, just like so many other defendants who might be charged with a crime–which they may really not even guilty of. In Holmes case the presence of a “smoking gun,” becomes a cruel pun, and one that is insufficient to describe the enormity of his offense, or, to deliver any adequate justice as punishment for them. However, the purpose of our laws is to protect the innocent beyond a reasonable doubt, and, in a nation that prides justice and due process, the players will just have to carry out the legal process–even though this case is really quite transparent. This the only way to insure equal protection under the law, for any,and for all of us! It is also what separates us from the Taliban, from a terrorist’s IED, and from living in the icy shadow of any spoiled tin horned dictator! Like it or not, even a horrific act like the Aurora massacre, does not justify denying even James Holmes, of his rights!
This sick person, will either be locked up for a long time in a either a prison, or in a maximum security mental hospital–he WILL BE PREVENTED from doing violent acts again. Even so, the effects of untreated mental illness are tragic for us all, and even the perpetrator can become an unwitting victim.
I have a question someone reading this may be able to answer.
If I have a drivers license and begin suffering from siezures or I have a stroke that causes a handicap that makes it difficult to drive, that information is sent to the DMV and my license is pulled. Not until the physician provides proof that I am able to once again drive safely can I take the test, both written and behind the wheel to get my license back.
What are the laws concerning gun permits? How did this guy get a permit with this mental problem? How did he keep the gun permit once diagnosed? If found to be metally ill and then, through treatment, that mental disorder is brought under control, what affect does that have on the ability to obtain a gun permit?
Before we go off half-cocked and demand changes to gun laws, we need to know what the gun laws on the books today control. If James Holmes was under the care of a physician for mental issues, he should have never been issued a permit nor been able to continue to have a permit. Once diagnosed, those should have been pulled and the guns they allowed placed in safe keeping until he was once again metally stable to own a gun. If we do not enforce existing laws, what good are more laws that will not be enforced?
Right now I have seen nothing to indicate that people that are mentally ill are not prohibited from owning guns in all the debate that has occurred since the Co shootings.
Here we go.
I am waiting for the day when patient confidentiality for psychiatrists/ psychologists is tossed out the window for “our safety”.
When that happens, I know I’ll start recommending that no one ever see one for help, because then anything you say while in the presence of one will be used against you (by employers, by the government, by faceless internet trolls, by spouses in the midst of divorce, by neighbors, etc.).
This is why we should talk about restricting the weapons. The alternative — restricting the humans — is far more intrusive on our civil liberties and lives than restricting the phallic gratification of owning a Big Gun.
Barky, in Colorado there are actual suspensions of patient confidentiality… when a person is alleged to have committed a felony/ state or fed, a shrink will be asked to produce all records, phone logs, notes, etc. Because persons who work for agencies and schools are required to keep records, often to have their funding continued, shrinks there often keep far more detailed notes than private practice persons who sometimes keep minimums as required/if required by law or by the ethics of their specialty. There are instances in the law where a shrink can redact records, giving a summary instead of turning over the entire file, but it depends.
In my experience over the decades watching changing trends, the most HUGE breach of confidentiality for persons who seek therapy is IF they use their health insurance. The breaches of confidentiality are rampant with insurance companies buying and selling the info as ‘preexisting condition’ and not wanting to pay for further therapy, or if they can get away with it, declining medical expenses because of a person’s diagnosis by, say a psychiatrist, ten years ago. I’m sorry to say it is already a fait acompli that employers, government, law enforecment, insurance companies already can use /access data about a person.
In the 1980s I stopped taking insurance and just kept my fees low, and recommended to friends that if they saw a shrink, to self pay, for the HR people at work see the invoices and tho people are supposed to be bound to confidentiality, human nature sometimes does otherwise.
Your points were thoughtful… and restricting weaponry is still an open question too.
What Barky and dr. e., said.
Barky..so if 1/10th percent of people are insane, we pass laws that restrict rights of the other 99.9% of the people?
This is where I say we are going off 1/2 cocked as that 1/10th percent of people will find ways to circumvent a law, any law passed.
Anyone think someone as intellegent as Holmes could not find ways to kill 12 and injure scores of others is not using all of their brain. Just watch TV or play a video game and many ways will come to mind that will accomplish that outcome.
Dr. E., thank you. You have adequately scared the bejeezus out of me.
It did not dawn on me until just now that our health care system routinely violates patient-doctor confidentiality in that way. It should have dawned on me, with all the “pre-existing condition” restrictions, but it didn’t until just now.
So I certainly hope a warrant is required. Do you also know if such records, when presented, become part of the public record or not? Is there at least legislation that prevents exposure of such records until charges are actually pressed?
I can understand breaking the confidentiality in the event of the commitment of a crime. It makes me uncomfortable (based on the amount of wrongful prosecutions — much less convictions — out there), but at least I understand it.
More on my forthcoming reply to RP …
RP,
I have no idea how you made the leap from my post to yours. However, let me expand on my post (this is very long, I wish I had the magic of brevity, but c’est la vie):
Let’s say that we decide that “guns need to be kept away from the crazies”.
First, you have to figure out what you need to look for. If you look at the past histories of mass-shooters over the past 20 years, you’ll see things like:
a) criminal records (although only a few had prior felonies)
b) complaint records (restraining orders, that sort of thing)
c) troubling military service records
d) poor school performance (unexplained, rapidly-changing school performance seems to be a common thread)
e) family who saw it coming (a tragic fact in many of these cases)
f) inability to work with others
g) tendency to be a loner or a “nice, quiet guy”
h) tendency to write manifestos, notebooks, etc. expressing troubling or dangerous opinions
i) some have moved a lot, city-to-city
j) disturbing purchasing patterns
Second, you need to figure out where you need to pull this data. The sources of the data are:
a) court records
b) police records
c) military service records
d) school records (grade, high, college, other)
e) interviews with family members
f) interviews with co-workers, fellow students, others
g) interviews with neighbors
h) Facebook, message board posts, Twitter, YouTube, others. (I won’t bring up subpoenaing personal journals or diaries).
i) Post office change-of-address form records
j) credit card history, financial records.
Let’s add on a final requirement, and that is “how long do we want this background check to take.” Let’s use the 3-day waiting period as the gold standard (although many in the gun lobby hate even that).
Now you tell me: how are we going to get the right data, as described above, to profile “crazies” in three days?
Here’s a reality check: the federal government does this stuff when doing background checks for security clearances. I believe their goal is 30 days for a temporary one, but it can take up to 90 days to a year for a “permanent” one (which expires after so many years). It’s heavily outsourced to squadrons of professional interviewers all over the country, and must cost a fortune. Who will pay that tab for commercial gun sales? A “gun tax”? And who’s going to do it? Bass Pro Shop? Wal-Mart? Uncle Bubba’s Live Bait and Assault Weapons Emporium? Good God, save us all …
So, if pro-active background checks (meaning “Bob Smith wants a gun, let’s investigate Bob Smith”) takes an intolerable 30 days and costs a fortune to do properly, what’s the cheaper alternative? Databases. Let’s load all this stuff into the NND: National Nutcase Database.
Now you’re talking about collating all this data centrally and letting some minimum-wage grunt point-and-click his way through to see if Bob Smith is in this database. That can surely be done in 3 days! Hell, with today’s high-tech computers, that can be done in 3 minutes (assuming Fred from accounting isn’t using up all the bandwidth surfing porn again).
But here’s the rub: anyone in the country can, at any time, walk into a gun store and ask to buy a gun. That database can’t just contain those who want guns, I could be totally disinterested in guns until I feel like I want to shoot someone. So this database can’t be “opt-in” by gun owners, it’ll have to cover EVERYONE!
So everyone has to feed records into the NND. Not just the courts, cops, & militaries, but schools as well. Post offices. And mental health professionals. Oh, and if you have a “quiet neighbor”, maybe you should report that to the NND. Plus we have to create content-scraping engines on all Facebook and Twitter accounts to see if anything there is NND-worthy.
Well now, phew, that wasn’t so bad, was it? Here we have an NND, and frankly, if we find & name all the people posting violent content on FB and make sure they don’t buy guns, then that’s fine.
Well, no.
See, here’s the problem with post-facto “symptoms”. In hindsight, they indicate warning signs. Pro-actively, however, they are nearly useless. How many people have problems in school, including sudden grade decline? Lots, and for all sorts of reasons besides a psychotic break. How many people don’t work well with others? Lots. And who judges that anyway? Maybe it’s the guy who works with Bob Smith who’s the problem, and poor ol’ Bob is a great guy!
How many people are “nice, quiet neighbors”? I live in a New England condo development of about 150 units. I bet 2/3rds of us lead quiet lives in the eyes of our neighbors (New Englanders are not particularly outgoing). So all of us would likely have entries in the National Nutcase Database.
And then, before too long, businesses will use the NND for hiring, banks will use it for lending, it will be public (due to FOIA) so neighbors can look up neighbors. Holy sh*t, this is ain’t just George Orwell, it’s George Frackin’ Orwell Mecha-Godzilla!!
Here’s the bottom line:
There is no viable method to detect and prevent “crazy people” from owning guns, except in the most obvious of cases. And any method that would be viable would be such a violation of ALL our rights, it would make the entire bloody Constitution invalid, never mind the 2nd Amendment.
It is high time for sanity in gun regulation. We can’t detect crazy, all we can do is minimize the carnage that crazy can inflict. In my opinion, this means that weapons whose sole purpose is mass killing: rapid-fire with a round capacity of greater than 11 (or 13, or 21, or whatever logic dictates) be banned. Other actions, such as suspicious purchases, should be reported & pursued to determine legitimacy. Is that imperfect to gun owners? Yes.
But for crying out loud, the alternative is a lot worse.
Dear Barky, NND says it all. And it will look cool on a shoulder patch or a lapel pin.
BTW: Big Brother approves.
Barky, thanks for your insight. I can be convinced to accept your point of view, but I would like to see futher info out of CO before deciding if multiple round clips is the answer or a complete ban on all guns with clips is the answer.
How can we pick a number of bullets and say 12 is OK, but 13 is not. How about 21 but 22 is illegal. Remember, Holmes AR15 jambed, so did he kill everyone with the assualt rifle, or how did the two handguns he had in his possession come into play. What about the shot gun? Did he fire that? Two handguns with 6 or 8 rounds (I have no idea how many a glock holds) gives an insane person 12-16 chances to kill 12-16 other people, and when they are cowarded down behind seats in a theater, it does not take one who is a good shot to kill another person that close up. If they have clips, then a trained person can change a clip in seconds and continue firing.
My whole point is everyone has their own ideas and they may or may not work. There is an answer to this problem, but the answer will not come out of reactionary rhetoric that always follows mayhem. It will come when nothing has happened and two sides can talk about solutions without the media and bloggers commanding the attention.
as far as I know Barky, though there could be a warrant issued, often it’s a subpoena to produce records.
to answer your questions, noting I’m a shrink not a lawyer, but was chair and an appointed member of the Colorado State Grievance Board for 13 years, and with a DA at my side in every hearing… I’d say in CO the records once redacted or turned over in a criminal case pending, are to be private in terms of client-attorney privilege, but I think parts or all can be/must be shared with opposing counsel in the case of a criminal suit–if one side or the other wishes to use then in defense or prosecution.
I think, unless there is a leak– and those seem rampant nowadays– the records are NOT public record [in total] until or unless a person is found guilty. But that can vary too: In the Columbine massacre case for instance, because of the hounding of the newmedia to have Dylan’s and Eric’s psych records AND their notebooks and videos for what many felt to be inflammatory purposes, a judge sealed it all away so no one could see them (The parents of the the dead and the relatives of the wounded, were allowed a one night gathering to see the videos together, and then they were sealed).
Re legislation. In CO there are several layers of law, or exclusions from law, such as priests, ministers (who arent deemed to be doing psychotherapy in the same sense as a shrink and thereby have ‘a religious exemption.’ and are not bound by the same state laws). In the CRS’ there is exclusion from public sight any grievance made against shrinks for instance, unless they are found guilty. This was lobbied for by one class of shrinks, the psychologists, who felt that if THEIR insuring companies got wind of the grievance (through yearly application that asks specifically, have you been grieved against since last app?), whether they were guilty or not, their insurance premium would skyrocket. Another happenstance brought to bear by seeming automaton-like insurers: if it moves, double its rates.
In cases of criminal charges pending, for instance re James Holmes, rightfully his shrink’s records can certainly be subpoena-ed, but the content of them, ought not be public… until or unless he is tried, in which case, some or all will be/can be presented in court, and ‘the people’ as represented by the prosecution, will hear whatever the prosecution and defense choose to use pro and con.
In all these matters Barky, the insurance companies, I think, are still the greater source of info being bandied about, including people’s records getting mixed up in electronic transmissions to huge insurance databases, so that you are in good health, but someone with a name like yours who has a difficult medical history is now noted on your record and you are denied insurance because of pre-existing conditions you never had. Sorting that out and gettng ins to aright that, is not easy. It’s a whole different kind of identity theft that comes from carelessness/ operator error in either doctors’ offices or insurance data input persons.
hope that helps
Dr. E., thanks for the info. Very informative.
RP, first on the count of bullets, I toss out odd number of 11 or 13 and what-not because handguns do have clips, so it’s “10 in clip + 1 in chamber” or some such math. The exact nimber would be a negotiation amongst legislatures and/or regulators.
On the subject of jammed weapons, imagine the death toll if it disn’t jam. We can’t rely on manufacturer’s defects or user error to save us.
Finally, on the subject of “we must wait for facts”, well, screw that. This has happened over and over and over again, and we do NOTHiNG except make guns easier to get. It’s a gun lobby tactic: they know we are children with short attention spans and use that to their advantage. We should be acting now, but we don’t because our elected officials tell js to “wait” and then the new season of American Idle starts up and we forget.
Slight premature send on the prior post. We have plenty of incidents in our past that we know enough. There’s not mich more to learn by waiting for Aurora to shake itself loose.
Is it my vivid imagination that Holmes reminds me of a modern day Raskolnikov .
Dostoyevsky wrote the most fantastic novel in Crime and Punishment and I thought of it shortly after Holmes’s massacre.
“Raskolnikov, who in setting himself in the role of a superman of Napoleonic and Nietzchean Hue, decides to commit murder as a matter of principle to pursue a higher purpose.
“http://www.academicjournals.org/err/PDF/Pdf%202009/Apr/Uwamsoba.pdf
Is Holmes a sicko genius faking an ordinary sicko, I think so. Just my opinion.
The question is was he insane or putting on an act? If he’s not insane, why did he do it? What possible motive could he have, a lethal injection, or at best the rest of his life in max security psych hospital. There was no possibility of monetary gain. Being insane enough to believe he is going to be hailed as some sort of revolutionary
hero, like McVey and the bloke in Norway is the only possible explanation. Other examples are Australia’s Martin Bryant, Julian Knight, even Ned Kelly actually believed that there was a groundswell of support for their naive political beliefs in that they were firing the first shots of a revolution which would immediately commence once the fuse was lit. Even if they go to jail their supporters will turn up with a truck bomb and blow a hole in the wall and get them out. Hence not trying to escape after the massacre. They totally misinterpret what they see and hear, from a variety of sources. It’s still psychotic but has a crude logic to it. His bulging eyes are definitely those of someone with hyperthyroidism, commonly associated with schizophrenia. It doesn’t have to be Graves disease, simply the result of long term unremitting stress.
He was washed up, a failed PhD, no income from NIH once he quit his PhD, had to be out of his flat within a month of quitting, and going by what his mother said, I don’t think he would have been welcome at his parent’s place. Even with the qualifications he had he just couldn’t get work. Too weird. So his mother puts up the money initially for him to go back to Uni to do his PhD Best job he could ever get was a stint at McDonalds. Imagine how demeaning that would have been for a qualified, with honors, neurobiologist. To him, the system is a Fascist monster that has screwed him to the point that all he’s got left is suicide, no friends, couldn’t relate to women, a failed PhD, no job and soon to be homeless. He IS washed up. He sees himself as some sort of left wing revolutionary, Che?
Then there is the Presbyterian religion. Did he believe that he was dammed as indicated by his all round failure and that killing a bunch of Batman worshipers, ie Fascists, was the only way God would save him from Hell. As he got weirder the ridicule, which NOBODY would admit to, would intensify which would make him even weirder and ever more paranoid, getting messages from the tele, billboards, music etc. The system has created the only one way out for him. Thus the system is every bit as psychotic as he is, because it spawned him.
A trial has to start with the University, with no threats of prosecution so that people don’t clam up. Same with Holmes. This situation is unique in that this guy is in the midst of research into psychiatric disorders, psychiatrists etc. at a major University and yet nobody can see this coming. Jesus wept!!!! His psychiatrist herself is very disturbed, on Xanax and Vicodin, has been reprimanded years before by the hospital for wrongly prescribing drugs for friends and Uni colleagues. If the US of A can’t learn from THIS situation then it is DOOMED. If Holmes gets burned, America goes up in the flames with him. Check out all of the really disturbed blogs and he is being hailed as a scapegoat, a martyr even.
a modern day Raskolnikov
I appreciate all of the debate over who and what behaviors to include in a data base intended to screen potential gun buyers, and I recognize the inherent problems. However, It often seems that, in cases like this, the shooter leaves some glaring red flag issues in his wake–issues that everyone from the gun shop owner, to the persons neighbors, or to his daily acquaintances, seem amazingly, we not be receptive to?
I’m unsure of the validity of this example, but, I have heard accounts on major media outlets, about glaring warning signs, that one would think should have been immediate cause for concern. The particular example I heard was on a news report that stated Holmes had actually purchased $160 pounds (or dollars worth) of ammunition. Although I am not a gun enthusiast,and therefore know very little about the subject, either statistic would seem enough of a warning flag to me. You know, how many mentally well-balanced customers would actually purchase such a large amount of ammunition along with several assault weapons and a shot gun? He also made several online purchases which he had received while working at the University where he originally pursued his Doctorate. So I would hope that anyone who had seen him purchase body armor or other unusual battle gear, would have immediately sat up and taken notice. Apparently that did not happen, or, people just didn’t want to risk making a report about something uncertain that there MIGHT actually, have been a good reason to bring up.
I also appreciate the comments which call into question, the sale of ammunition clips with a large amount of rounds–didn’t Holmes have one that held a hundred rounds? Does anyone think that the average person would need 100 rounds to defend himself against any intruder–except for Rambo maybe?
I also think I’m not alone in wondering what kind of flawed logic is behind the use of legal gun shows that permit the sale of heavy combat weapons from the trunk of people’s cars, and often go unreported in exchange for cash! Is it any wonder so many assault weapons easily end up in the hands of unscrupulous Mexican drug cartels?
I guess my point is that, when apparently ordinary people, start going to unusual extremes when buying something like lethal weaponry, aren’t there plenty of warning signs that could immediately be reported by any anonymous, but concerned citizens, to their local police.
I suppose even raising obvious red flags before law enforcement people are legally committed to investigate, would not solve everything either, but, as many politicians have said, “Do average people really require assault weapon?” Doesn’t an effective deterrent sometimes include common sense alarm that a perpetrator’s neighbors,teachers,classmates, family or friends, cannot help but express to authorities?
Unfortunately in a free society like ours, these guys are lost in the multitudes of characters, weirdos, eccentric and otherwise “not normal” folks that we tolerate and accept as part of our society.
Until we are so advanced that we are able to have “Thought Police” (then we are no longer a free society), I think there is no way to effectively screen potential killers if we want to have minimal government interference in our daily lives.
However it would be nice to be able to somehow stop some of these guys and/or minimize the damage they do, so yes banning HC magazines would be a good start. Of course that would be after we get enough
politicians that have some guts to propose and pass legislation.
Of course the common comeback whenever someone commits a horrific crime in response to some personal sense of failure or distress in his/her life is,that, plenty of other people are also fired, rejected by girlfriends, drop out of school etc., but they do not commit mass murders. So, why then did Holmes break the mold in several ways?
One such great difference is that he did NOT commit suicide when apprehended and DID tip off police that his apartment was booby trapped as soon as he was arrested. These atypical actions provide yet more deviations from common logic that might point to some sort of a motive. I would guess that his behavior was the result of the onset of some sort of serious mental illness which he was not being treated (adequately at least) for. Even many madmen who commit mass murders often have some deranged political, social or religious motive along with their mentally unbalanced psyches, and most of them commit suicide rather than face up to something they know is a crime, and which they WILL be punished severely for. This type of conscious understanding seems so far, to be absent in Holmes’s case. But If more news comes out we may yet learn something different.
I’m just saying that we shouldn’t be in a rush to pass judgement about what was wrong or what Holmes state of mind was before he committed this, apparently, motiveless crime. Even if he perceived himself as some sort of unique moral and intellectual genius like Raskolnikov in CRIME AND PUNISHMENT, this would be far from any valid indication that he was only a political malcontent. The murder Raskolnikov committed received many more personal justifications in the novel than we have yet had a chance to hear from Holmes about any possible rationalizations that he may have considered to be justifiable reasons for his assault.
I would not be surprised that, when more news comes out, we might learn that this violent episode had more to do with a chemical imbalance rather than a heartless desire to cause horrible carnage. Again,We do know that in most similar cases, the perpetrator kills him/her self rather than wait around to face justice. It is even more curious that a plan to detonate explosives as police entered his apartment was also willingly revealed by himself! The jury should literally and figuratively, still be out and undecided in this strange case.
Stranger and stranger indeed, this will be hard to understand compared to say a Gifford’s type case.