Perhaps not a popular position, but in the long haul, the DP may not have been the best outcome.
I live just over an hour from the scene of this shooting. I am not without a deep appreciation of the painful impact of this case, although I cannot say my experience is remotely that of a family member or friend. But I can say that from the beginning that all the mental illness talk and images of the perpetrator, with his flaming orange hair and pop-eyed facial expression of "Me so crazy", were lost on me. He is simply, in my opinion, just another self-loathing hate-projecting coward who was smarter and more arrogant than the usual brand of criminal, and grandiose enough in his self-involvement to carry out a fantasy where he was center-stage in an act of revenge. And why is he so mad? Because he's a failure at getting along in the world. Period.
He systematically planned the slaughter of innocent people who simply went to see a movie, and then also planned to blow up any of our first responders who got near his little apartment kingdom where he conceived his act of cowardice. I will refrain from commenting on what I think of the shrink he was seeing. But I will say that one day I hope to see the DSM tossed out of credible environments of authentic scientific inquiry and called what it is - a formerly useful tool for facilitating third party reimbursement. No doubt another unpopular opinion.
So, in regard to sentencing such an individual - who, in my view, is only "sick" in the sense of the cultural vernacular, as in a pathetically "sick" joke, or nauseatingly "sick" POV - I have no problem with a death penalty outcome as far as what he deserves commensurately. But I do have a problem with his final consequences being held up year after year, under the mantle of "Too sick to kill", or "Too sad a clown", and where he is the center-stage Victim. I have a problem with seeing his otherwise forgettable name and image in the papers, in law journals, in psych literature, and being routinely reminded of his presence every time his lawyers and shrinks lament on the taxpayer's dime that it's wrong to end the life of such a "sick" person. I have a problem with ever seeing anything about him in print again.
If we are to truly be progressive and just and even sane in what we do with this type of human failure, we need to first strip them of their notoriety. Other than the obvious standard of transparency required by our system of government and its free press, the focus should be on victims and families, with references to the perpetrators limited to perfunctory information about evidence, charges, court dates, trial outcomes, and final sentencing, with the latter informing the public of a mundane chore. Imagine a culture where individuals like this are swiftly relegated to a position of receding scenery, and merely characterized as just another criminal and stalker of prey responsible for yet another act of violence. What should then distinguish these mass murder scenes from one other and make what happened memorable is the unique individuality of each victim and how much they each mattered in a world where they had station, had goals, had potential, had stories, and were loved by others.
Currently, the media is an accomplice in how these criminals are treated and elevated to archetypal storybook status. My guess is, if we gave these people no more coverage than it takes to meet basic journalistic guidelines and we stopped making them central characters, then whether we kill them or stuff them away in the dustbin of prison life would become a matter of rote details we could accept either way. I can't think of a better outcome than for these arrogant cowards to become just another number in the general math of the penal system. Dead or alive, they would be dismissed as baggage for either routine warehousing or disposal.
I personally think all of these types of perps
should be killed. But when that isn't the outcome or when, realistically, the end for them won't come until the last lawyer has played his last card and heartbroken family members are utterly worn out, and sometimes no longer living themselves, I find perspective in this:
The obituary of Colorado's Lacy Miller, who was brutally murdered and dumped and set on fire, was written by her family in first person, as they believed
she would have written it. When I was initially so troubled and frustrated by her mom's advocacy for sparing the life of her perpetrator, I would think of Lacy's 'last words.'
http://www.2hearts4lacy.org/page/page/3131264.htm
No sentence can compete for the value and meaning of the life of an innocent victim, or ever truly be equitable. So to the extent then that we can inflict upon the perpetrator some measure of retribution, perhaps the perpetrator of the Aurora killings ultimately gets what's coming to him - a forgettable backseat to his victims whose lives were and are larger than any fleeting attention his "sick" idea offered him.
FWIW
In memory of my fellow Coloradans
:happydance:
