TN - Shooting at private Christian Covenant School, Nashville, suspect dead, multiple victims, 27 Mar 2023 #2

[Sundog]

So should the public respect those highest priorities and not push for the writings to be released?

I assume the judge in this case will take into consideration the safety concerns of Covenant and redact any material that she reasonably thinks would jeopardize their safety, and the safety of their members and their students. The judge will need to weigh this carefully while balancing the public's right to know as will also be presented at the hearings by various groups, including representatives from the Tennesse state legislature.

 

[angelainwi]

I assume the judge in this case will take into consideration the safety concerns of Covenant and redact any material that she reasonably thinks would jeopardize their safety, and the safety of their members and their students. The judge will need to weigh this carefully while balancing the public's right to know as will also be presented at the hearings by various groups, including representatives from the Tennesse state legislature.

Why is there a right for the public to know what is in the writings? If the victims and the church do not want the writings released why do we not respect their wishes? Why is the public want to know more important?

 

[Sundog]

Why is there a right for the public to know what is in the writings? If the victims and the church do not want the writings released why do we not respect their wishes? Why is the public want to know more important?

These records were seized by the government which makes them public, and individuals have the right to request access to public documents. If there is a legal reason to withhold this public information by the government, then the government needs to justify this based on the law. That is why the magistrate in Nashville is holding hearings this week to hear from both sides and make a decision based on the law and arguments of all parties who have filed lawsuits and/or motions for or against the release of the documents.

This is the way our legal system works. The crimes against Covenant are also crimes against the state.

 

[MyBelle]

I assume the judge in this case will take into consideration the safety concerns of Covenant and redact any material that she reasonably thinks would jeopardize their safety, and the safety of their members and their students. The judge will need to weigh this carefully while balancing the public's right to know as will also be presented at the hearings by various groups, including representatives from the Tennesse state legislature.

BBM. To me, it sounds like the shooter's parents now own her writings and are turning them over to the victims' families. This is going to have to be resolved in a real courtroom rather than in the court of public opinion.

JMO

ETA: link

Parents of Covenant shooter want to hand over writings to victims' families

The attorney representing the parents of The Covenant School shooter says they want to hand over all rights and ownership of the writings to the children of the school.

www.newschannel5.com

Attorney David Raybin — who is representing the shooter's parents — argues the shooter's writings are the property of the parents and they should get to decide what happens to them. If the judge agrees, the victims' families could theoretically decide what happens to the writings. If that request is granted, the writings would likely never be made public.

 

[Sundog]

BBM. To me, it sounds like the shooter's parents now own her writings and are turning them over to the victims' families. This is going to have to be resolved in a real courtroom rather than in the court of public opinion.

JMO

At this juncture during an ongoing investigation, I doubt that LE and the FBI will have to return the documents they seized to anyone who claims to "own" them. Materials are seized in the majority of criminal cases, and durng this time they become public records. Perhaps when LE closes the investigation, they have to return items back to legal "owners", but for now the documents are in the hands of LE/the government.

I agree that the judge will likely have to rule on this issue and then move on to the lawsuits requesting release of the documents.


ETA: As an adult apparently without a will, as has been reported, I assume the shooter's parents will have to go through probate court before taking legal "ownership" of the shooter's possessions. Maybe they have already done that. Until the probate court rules, the parents are not able to give the documents to anyone else.

 

[housewife]

Or, they could be thinking along the lines we previously discussed, and they may feel releasing the writings to the public could contribute to another copycat-type event by an unstable person. A few peer-reviewed studies indicate the media coverage surrounding these shootings could contribute to future shooting events.

We may never know unless the parents come out and state their reasoning.

RSBM
Unfortunately peer reviewed studies are not understood or valued by everyone. I wish our country’s education was better. It’s impossible to create change if our citizens view science as “being told what to think”.

 

[GRT]

At this juncture during an ongoing investigation, I doubt that LE and the FBI will have to return the documents they seized to anyone who claims to "own" them. Materials are seized in the majority of criminal cases, and durng this time they become public records. Perhaps when LE closes the investigation, they have to return items back to legal "owners", but for now the documents are in the hands of LE/the government.

I agree that the judge will likely have to rule on this issue and then move on to the lawsuits requesting release of the documents.


ETA: As an adult apparently without a will, as has been reported, I assume the shooter's parents will have to go through probate court before taking legal "ownership" of the shooter's possessions. Maybe they have already done that. Until the probate court rules, the parents are not able to give the documents to anyone else.

Good points! I think the above emboldened may vary by jurisdiction.

JMOO, mass shooters' manifestos often contain extremist views, hateful ideologies, or detailed accounts of their actions. Releasing such a manifesto to the public could potentially inspire or incite others to commit similar acts of violence.

Likewise, there are arguments in favor of releasing the manifesto to the public in the interest of transparency and fostering public understanding. Citizens might have a right to know the details of the incident, the shooter's motivations, or the missed warning signs.

However, I think they try to balance these considerations with any potential negative consequences. It will be interesting to see what happens. If the church gains ownership of the documents, I doubt they will see the light of day.

 

[GRT]

RSBM
Unfortunately peer reviewed studies are not understood or valued by everyone. I wish our country’s education was better. It’s impossible to create change if our citizens view science as “being told what to think”.

From your lips to God's ears...

 

[elevatorific]

RSBM
Unfortunately peer reviewed studies are not understood or valued by everyone. I wish our country’s education was better. It’s impossible to create change if our citizens view science as “being told what to think”.

I've been trying to think of any instance where a shooter's writings have led to any change to prevent another in the future. I've got nothing.

I highly value transparency and support the eventual release of Hale's writings. I just think its hard to view the vast collection of publicly available so-called-manifestos as anything but a net negative, and any claim that there is a benefit to the lay public treating such documents as some kind Rosetta stone is disingenuous.

IMO

 

[cujenn81]

At this juncture during an ongoing investigation, I doubt that LE and the FBI will have to return the documents they seized to anyone who claims to "own" them. Materials are seized in the majority of criminal cases, and durng this time they become public records. Perhaps when LE closes the investigation, they have to return items back to legal "owners", but for now the documents are in the hands of LE/the government.

I agree that the judge will likely have to rule on this issue and then move on to the lawsuits requesting release of the documents.


ETA: As an adult apparently without a will, as has been reported, I assume the shooter's parents will have to go through probate court before taking legal "ownership" of the shooter's possessions. Maybe they have already done that. Until the probate court rules, the parents are not able to give the documents to anyone else.

I assumed the parents are claiming ownership because the documents were likely left in the car she drove to the church/school, and the parents own the car IIRC. I could be totally wrong about that, though.

 

[elevatorific]

I assumed the parents are claiming ownership because the documents were likely left in the car she drove to the church/school, and the parents own the car IIRC. I could be totally wrong about that, though.

You are correct.

"Because the Hales’ child did not leave behind a will, Mr. Raybin said, they, as the most immediate surviving relatives, had become the legal owners of the documents that the police took as evidence. (The couple, Mr. Raybin said, also owned the vehicle and the home where the writings were found.)"

School Shooter’s Parents Will Hand Ownership of Writings to Victims

The family’s decision to relinquish legal ownership of writings left by the Nashville school shooter comes amid a fierce legal battle over whether the writings should be made public.

www.nytimes.com

 

[MyBelle]

At this juncture during an ongoing investigation, I doubt that LE and the FBI will have to return the documents they seized to anyone who claims to "own" them. Materials are seized in the majority of criminal cases, and durng this time they become public records. Perhaps when LE closes the investigation, they have to return items back to legal "owners", but for now the documents are in the hands of LE/the government.

I agree that the judge will likely have to rule on this issue and then move on to the lawsuits requesting release of the documents.


ETA: As an adult apparently without a will, as has been reported, I assume the shooter's parents will have to go through probate court before taking legal "ownership" of the shooter's possessions. Maybe they have already done that. Until the probate court rules, the parents are not able to give the documents to anyone else.

News articles have made it clear the writings are still in the hands of LE. Probate court is a legal process that will give the family ownership of all her personal property such as writings, her vehicle. I have no idea what kind of debt she carried nor is it relevant.

I think the Judge's decision--no matter what it happens to be--will be appealed. This is going to be a long slog thru the courts.

JMO

 

[GRT]

I assumed the parents are claiming ownership because the documents were likely left in the car she drove to the church/school, and the parents own the car IIRC. I could be totally wrong about that, though.

IANAL, but I think it might have to do with the laws concerning intestate succession (where possessions go when someone dies without a will) in that state.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

I get what you are saying, but (MOO) I don't think this fits the hate crime definition because it appears it was driven by personal grievances against the church.

That said, I'm not a fan of hate crime charges in general because a crime is a crime is a crime, and it's not like the family members of slain victims feel any different based on why the perpetrator committed the crime.

In order to qualify for hate crime designation, I think it has to be shown that the perpetrator targeted marginalized persons based on their marginalized status. For example, killing someone because of their race or religion.

I suppose the designation of this shooting could change if the shooter's manifesto claimed that he wanted to kill all Christians because he hates Christians. But more likely, he felt the church judged him unfairly and he decided to take revenge, which boots it out of hate crime status.

All just my opinion only.

That's just it. They aren't releasing the information for unknown reasons. So, we really don't know for certain what was going through Audrey's mind when she committed these heinous murders.

In my opinion, just as every race can and does have some racist members, so, too, can every religion experience a hate crime perpetuated against its members. (If we're going to have that designation on the books.) I'm not a fan of that designation either. In my view it's applied very unequally across crimes and perpetuators. I'd be fine if they did away with it. Audrey obviously didn't commit these crimes with love in her heart for the victims. AMOO

 

[GoBuckeyes]

BBM. To me, it sounds like the shooter's parents now own her writings and are turning them over to the victims' families. This is going to have to be resolved in a real courtroom rather than in the court of public opinion.

JMO

ETA: link

Parents of Covenant shooter want to hand over writings to victims' families

The attorney representing the parents of The Covenant School shooter says they want to hand over all rights and ownership of the writings to the children of the school.

www.newschannel5.com

Attorney David Raybin — who is representing the shooter's parents — argues the shooter's writings are the property of the parents and they should get to decide what happens to them. If the judge agrees, the victims' families could theoretically decide what happens to the writings. If that request is granted, the writings would likely never be made public.

Contrasting this process with how quickly critical pieces of the now infamous Laundry letter was made public.

 

[MyBelle]

I get what you are saying, but (MOO) I don't think this fits the hate crime definition because it appears it was driven by personal grievances against the church.

That said, I'm not a fan of hate crime charges in general because a crime is a crime is a crime, and it's not like the family members of slain victims feel any different based on why the perpetrator committed the crime.

In order to qualify for hate crime designation, I think it has to be shown that the perpetrator targeted marginalized persons based on their marginalized status. For example, killing someone because of their race or religion.

I suppose the designation of this shooting could change if the shooter's manifesto claimed that he wanted to kill all Christians because he hates Christians. But more likely, he felt the church judged him unfairly and he decided to take revenge, which boots it out of hate crime status.

All just my opinion only.

BBM. I agree. I think her grievances were against that particular school which she attended in the 3rd and 4th grades. Whether it is a "hate crime" really is irrelevant because the shooter is dead.

In the mass shooting at a Buffalo supermarket last year, AG Garland met with the families before deciding to charge it as a hate crime.
JMO

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/15/us/buffalo-shooting-payton-gendron-federal-charges/index.html

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

At the federal level, if the targetted victim or victims were targetted for their religious beliefs (including what the perp may believe to be unfairly judged by a Christian church), that IS a hate crime.

Learn About Hate Crimes

A hate crime is a crime motivated by bias against race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability. Learn more about hate crimes in the United States.

www.justice.gov

The state of TN defines it exactly the same way:

"A crime committed by a perpetrator who intentionally selected the person or the property that was damaged or otherwise affected by the crime, in whole or in part, because of the perpetrator’s belief or perception regarding the race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, or gender of that person or the owner or occupant of that property." Understanding Hate Crimes: Definitions

In this case, the mass shooting of Christian people in a Christian school, has not been designated a hate crime.
Personally I find that incredibly bizarre.

Maybe it hasn't been because there is no proof that it was? Again, just because a victim is Christian or any other religion, that alone doesn't make their murder a hate crime. There needs to be proof of the motivation.

Reminds me of the Orland Pulse gay nightclub shooting, where it was widely believed that the shooter chose that location out of homophobia, yet there has never been any good proof that it was. But I'm sure many, maybe most, people still believe that it was.

 

[MyBelle]

Maybe it hasn't been because there is no proof that it was? Again, just because a victim is Christian or any other religion, that alone doesn't make their murder a hate crime. There needs to be proof of the motivation.

Reminds me of the Orland Pulse gay nightclub shooting, where it was widely believed that the shooter chose that location out of homophobia, yet there has never been any good proof that it was. But I'm sure many, maybe most, people still believe that it was.

BBM. Good points! iirc, The Orlando shooter had also considered Disney World.

JMO

 

[Arkay]

Exactly.

I don’t understand our need to mystify the school’s motives for wanting to fight the release. Considering they don't even know all of what the writings include, the Occam’s razor of it all is that based on items they do know about - a "blueprint on total destruction,” journals dedicated to previous school shooters, firearms training materials, lots of artwork - I can totally understand why this traumatized school wouldn’t want to give the shooter notoriety with that.

To those who don’t think that’s a real concern, look no further than Elliot Rodger. Of course, he personally sent his deranged “memoir” out so widely that there was never a possibility to keep it from publishing. He is still lionized as a hero of incels, his memoir is their bible, and mass murderers have explicitly praised him as an inspiration for their attacks as far away as Oregon and Toronto. I’m not at all surprised that this church/school community would want to avoid that kind additional pain at all costs.

IMO, if there’s anything resembling a motive in Hale’s writings, I trust FBI BAU to uncover it and I see no reason why LE would want to hide such a finding. Quite the opposite.

But thus far, it sounds like there is no clear motive, just like so many shooters before this.

all jmo.

I've been trying to think of any instance where a shooter's writings have led to any change to prevent another in the future. I've got nothing.

I highly value transparency and support the eventual release of Hale's writings. I just think its hard to view the vast collection of publicly available so-called-manifestos as anything but a net negative, and any claim that there is a benefit to the lay public treating such documents as some kind Rosetta stone is disingenuous.

IMO

I agree with both of your posts, @elevatorific.

It’s my very strong opinion that, based on for example Elliot Rodgers, those who would commit these murders view their predecessors as elite role models. They wish to emulate them, even to outdo them.

Of course I have the human curiosity about what she wrote, but not enough that I think it should be released.

Really, what is the benefit to humanity? IMO each mass murderer has his or own uniquely deranged reason for their act, along with the desire for control, power, instilling fear in their “enemies,” and the wish to become one of the notorious “elite.”

If the release of these assorted manifestoes was a guarantee to end such horrors, I would be in favor of it. I just personally do not believe that to be true.

In almost all of these mass murders, the identity of the perpetrator is known. The only case that I recall a manifesto being helpful is when the murderer is unknown, such as the Unabomber. Of course he was not a mass murderer and not at the scene of his crimes, but rather was an unidentified longtime serial murderer. In this isolated case, the release of his manifesto tipped off his brother who was able to identify him.

Again, when the culprit is on the scene and there is no doubt about who is responsible, I believe that a cost/benefit analysis would be on the side of tampering the flame, rather than igniting it further and inspiring more copycats. Apparently the notoriety is alluring to many who may be contemplating killing more innocents. I don’t think my desire to know outweighs that.

JMO, of course.

 

[Ravenmoon]

I have so many thoughts, feelings and questions about what happened.

I have not put my two cents in because I would lean towards the thought that, as often, people are not going to agree with or like what I have to say.

If anyone reads this and takes the time to process it, I have to start with this:

What the shooter did is the lowest action that any individual can take in this lifetime. It is deplorable, disgusting. No amount of abuse they MAY have suffered will be explained or leveled by the murder of innocents.

My THEORY is killer was admonished daily by their family because of their orientation. The family is religious. This type of lifestyle to them was a choice. They were embarrassed and ashamed that their child could be anything but a straight person that followed their path.

If the Manifesto were to be released, some questions would be answered that loom large.

Was conversion therapy used? Did the killer feel that everyone was against them?

We know that there was Asperger's or some type of Autism that put the killer on the spectrum, don't we? Could that have played a part in not being able or possibly allowed to have healthy coping mechanisms?

To me, it sounds as though this killer always felt like an abomination. Now, they proved that very thing to be true.

I would also like to remind people about certain laws being passed in Tennessee that target certain types of people.

Maybe with everything thrown together, it was enough for this killer to flip a switch.

Yes, the manifesto should be public. It's the law. No, it will NEVER explain or excuse what this person has done.

Child and animal killers are the absolute worst.
Period.

IMO, Something important in those documents holds information that exposes treatment of certain people. I don't know by whom. But it's there and that is probably why this is being held back.

This is the United States. It's public information. Redact names. Redact addresses and phone numbers. Protect the victims.

This is ALL. JMO