Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
Why.
Me not.
I was just asking two very legitimate and important questions: now that the case of 2007 is reopened, can an unbiased and unobstructed examination be expected in a department like LA with a certain kind of not really positive reputation that lasts since very long time now, and with the to be expected political pressure to get the report that is wanted to avoid more attention being drawn to this mess. And second question, what will it mean - for example for the public perception - when it is now found that the guys' original file report on his colleague - was correct and justified?
And later I added in the second post that you simply do not know whether he was just born evil, or in other ways turned bad by his own responsibility - or whether he had no other choice than to become what he became due to for example a genetic disposition to form a psychosis, a personality syndrome, whatever.
Why you accused me of excusing what he did, and wrote all the other stuff, simply is beyond me.
Heck, even Bin Laden'S motivation could be explained - without being accused of defending what he did.
|
We can look for explanations, but those don't justify murder.
I think it rather obvious they reopened the case hoping it might calm him, not to solve anything, but now they're stuck with that can of worms.
I didn't accuse you, I said we don't excuse murdering innocent people.
Neither of us know if he was born evil, but I don't think any of us are. I don't know all his history, except I've seen no reports of serious mental issues with him. The fact he was in the service and police force, they're pretty good at spotting nuts.
Again, he may have been right in his complaint, he should've taken proper action, he didn't. He was motivated with anger, that caused him to seek revenge.