Ex-LAPD policeman surrounded in cabin in Big Bear, CA

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Armistead

You excused it with the "However". It's like saying "I'm sorry, BUT".

There is no explanation except he was angry and evil. Millions of people suffer wrong and have no need to murder innocent people. My guess is some of his complaint is right, but after he was fired, instead of picking up his life like normal people do, he fumed in anger for years. I bet he was killing people in his head years ago. He chose not to make proper change in his life. He could've filed a civil lawsuit, called the NAACP, fought racism, helped others. Instead he blamed others, giving up control of his life. Sure, we could find explanations for his anger, but not for his murdering innocent people.

I got wrongly fired once, because my Supervisor lied to protect his butt, was I mad, you bet, did I go on a shooting rampage killing innocent people....no.

All that so far is just your belief.

Next time you are in town, go to the library and get a book on psyciatric case-studies. You'd be surprised to learn that people can be or become that mad that they become delusional, start to hear voice sin their head, write hundreds of pages of cryptic theories about how they think "they" are watching them from 5th dimension, and finally started to kill people.

I do not excuse what he did, and I said that several times, in black on white letters. But if you cannot differ between an excuse and an explanation - I do not buy your theory on how the one leads to the other necessarily - then the problem is with you, and your exlcusively. And when I ask those two question that I pout up, your reaction just is to accuse me of sympathising with a multiple murder and wanting to excuse that, I am getting slightly pissed by that, like I get pissed when I would get called a Nazi because I explained my view on how and why Hitler was able to come to power and install his control.

Excuse and explanation are two totally different things, to start with. You can enact as if you do not understand this in order to get a cheap opportunity for a quick slap at somebody. But still excuse remains to be something different than an explanation.

It also helps not to try to think with a by a bag of aroused emotions. Feeling, and thinking, are two different things too, you know.

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Skybird

All that so far is just your belief.

Next time you are in town, go to the library and get a book on psyciatric case-studies. You'd be surprised to learn that people can be or become that mad that they become delusional, start to hear voice sin their head, write hundreds of pages of cryptic theories about how they think "they" are watching them from 5th dimension, and finally started to kill people.

I do not excuse what he did, and I said that several times, in black on white letters. But if you cannot differ between an excuse and an explanation - I do not buy your theory on how the one leads to the other necessarily - then the problem is with you, and your exlcusively. And when I ask those two question that I pout up, your reaction just is to accuse me of sympathising with a multiple murder and wanting to excuse that, I am getting slightly pissed by that, like I get pissed when I would get called a Nazi because I explained my view on how and why Hitler was able to come to power and install his control.

Excuse and explanation are two totally different things, to start with. You can enact as if you do not understand this in order to get a cheap opportunity for a quick slap at somebody. But still excuse remains to be something different than an explanation.

It also helps not to try to think with a by a bag of aroused emotions. Feeling, and thinking, are two different things too, you know.

Certainly it's my belief, because it's my opinion, just as you have yours.

We call those people nut cases. I don't see that here, I see a man that got angry, instead of dealing with that anger, he let it spiral out of control to the point it consumed his life and he sought revenge. It's shameful how many are making a hero out of him. Who among us hasn't been so angry we didn't want to kill someone, but 99% of us realize it solves nothing and instead of blaming and ruining lives, we change ours and move on.

Life has always been a pile of unfair BS, it's something we as humans deal with and mostly live with. No doubt, sometimes it takes violence to bring forth change, but that is different than revenge. You can't compare revenge to a mass revolution of people fighting tyranny.

No doubt many social and cultural issues effect us all, sometimes unfairly. I agree we're all interconnected on many levels, we should try to deal with those issues, but it's not an excuse or explanation to murder innocent people.

As far as I can tell, there was nothing in this mans life to show any mental illness, in fact, this story is common, someone gets fired, they go to killing. It happens everyday. Most of us take responsibility for our lives, a few go into pity mode, blame others, you hurt me so I'll get you.

It's the new political correctness, no one is responsible for their actions anymore, someone else is at fault.


Any explanation for this behavior is unacceptable

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Certainly it's my belief, because it's my opinion, just as you have yours.

We call those people nut cases. I don't see that here, I see a man that got angry, instead of dealing with that anger, he let it spiral out of control to the point it consumed his life and he sought revenge.

Why.

It's shameful how many are making a hero out of him.

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.

[Armistead]

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.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Armistead

We can look for explanations, but those don't justify murder.

I did not claim it does. I saids exxactly the oppsoite. Two or three times

I didn't accuse you, I said we don't excuse murdering innocent people.

post #13, first sentence - your very first reaction to me.

Let's leave it here.

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I did not claim it does. I saids exxactly the oppsoite. Two or three times


post #13, first sentence - your very first reaction to me.

Let's leave it here.

Indeed, in that post you seemed to be excusing his actions based on assumed mental issues, but I'm not accusing you in that murder is justified over anger. Big difference.

[Skybird]

I. Assumed. Nothing. Becasue I know that I have no valid info on the whoel case - so I lack the database to even form a hypothesis, not to mention a theopry or a concluded assumption.

I could as well have said "even if the reason just would have been the red beard of his father or the blue eyes of his mother".

However, still not excusing anything and still not assuming anything, IF he would be found as mentally ill indeed, some serious psychosis, a progredient mental dementia, a serious personality syndrome, a psychopathic character as defined by DSM and or ICD, or whatever it is, that maybe would explain why he became what he became, or why his life pushed him over the edge where others would nto have ticked out, or why it all broke out of him due to that disease.

But then he would have been a sick man indeed - and depending on the circumstances and diagnosis, somebody being technically, causally responsible for what he did, but morally not, at least not in full. You cannot sentence a patient with Tourette syndrome for speaking offensively, or sentence a White for having the genes to have a white skin, or sentence a patient with a brain tumour destroying his mind and personality for having a brain tumor. You cannot sentence somebody for developing a personality disorder or suffering from schizophrenia, and having suffered a trauma that kicked him over the edge and led to lasting personality changes.

If you wanted to say that medical reasons to often are abused at courts, while holding no ground (the "patient" is a simulating non-patient only, he and his lawyer lie about his health "issues") - to that I would agree. At least to a wider degree than is politically correct in Europe, but to a probably lesser degree than maybe is common in the US.

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Skybird

...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...

of course and why not? Is the L.A. PD more or less racist than the:

-Frankfurt PD:

http://www.thelocal.de/national/20121108-46055.html


- Baden-Württemberg state PD:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-847831.html

- Dessau PD:

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/01/oury-j11.html

- Berlin PD:

http://www.freedominfonetwork.org/pr...acy-in-germany

[Platapus]

It seems like the body has been confirmed as the baddie. That's good.

[Hottentot]

In the light of this confirmation, his manifesto starts looking pretty sad. I mean he ranted for what seemed to be an endless wall of text about how he is practically invincible, always a step ahead and always has the initiative. I suppose his infallible masterplan had one fatal flaw: the reality.

[geetrue]

Remember the guy that shot up the other police down in LA and Riverside:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...ornia/2024341/

Now they say they won't pay due to Dorner killed himself before they could arrest him ...

Some California donors, including the city of Riverside, have withdrawn their part of more than $1 million in reward money offered for the capture and conviction of cop-killer Christopher Dorner, who committed suicide after a 10-day shooting spree in Southern California last month.
The city of Riverside had pledged $100,000 in reward money for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Dorner, who was suspected of killing four people