Bad Santa. No, I mean REALLY Bad.
 

From FoxNews.com

"It was not an amicable divorce."

No kidding.

I'm still a bit stunned by this one. I'm just glad dude offed himself, saving California 20 years of trials and appeals and motions before bleeding hearts insist that he was merely crazy and therefore not responsible for his murderous, psychopathic actions.

The first victim was an 8 year old girl, running to open the door for Santa.
Shot in the face.

I believe she's expected to recover.

Article isn't too clear that the "three" includes the 8yr old, I think that was written a bit poorly since the 8yrl old is mentioned in the paragraph before only. They are the only 3 mentioned thus far.

She did survive the shooting. I'll look around for more info on her.

I heard the 911 call from the 8 year old's mom on the news last night. She and the child apparently fled to another house, and were terrified that Pardo would come after them. The child's wound was relatively minor, and she was described as doing well, physically at least.

That is a screwed up way to find out that Santa isn't real, although I find an amusing sense of justice in his having set fire to himself.

From here: http://www.myfoxla.com/myfox/pages/H...d=1.1.1&sflg=1

She may recover physically but she will be fucked psychologically for the rest of her life. That's screaming PTSD or something similar.

After the divorce he still had $17,000 plus money for a plane ticket and a Santa suit? Wonder what he'd have done if he got screwed as much as most. :eyebrow:

I have no doubt of that pierce. Not to mention the trauma of seeing friends and family getting killed. I was just making it clear that she will live. Atleast it doesn't seem like she'll have any physical damage to her brain, like his son.
Its so freaky, a guy who seems perfectly stable, just goes psycho like that. You want to hope he was completely insane, although up until that point he was acting sane. You never know, that is scary as hell.

He obviously had some mental problem, many people do, but we may never find out what that is. We can do a detailed history of his past but without his input, its very tough to put the pieces together.

Last I heard was 16 children were left orphaned.

A total of 9 died.

Merry Christmas!!!

My wife and I sat beside each other in stunned disbelief as the news reporter told the story of the events beginning withe the little 8 yr. old girl answering the door and being shot in the face.
I remember us both turning to look at each other with mortified expressions on our faces.
Its hard to shake the image of a joyful, happy little girl opening the door to Santa...:sniff:

Some people become "animals", and others go on to become "monsters". :headshake

Doing crazy things does not make you crazy.

There was a lot of organized planning that went into this attack. It appears to have been a premeditated revenge crime, with a carefully planned escape. Would have worked, too, if he hadn't accidentally set fire to himself.

Not typical crazy guy stuff.

An angry aggressive man who couldn't handle losing his woman. If he can't have her, nobody can. That's not crazy, that's just fucked up. Selfish, selfish bastard. Happens all the time, just not usually with a santa suit.

Time after time, I hear on the news about some bloke killing his estranged wife, or ex girlfriend and their kids and then killing himself. Sometimes it's an asian family and the rationale is 'honour', often it isn't an asian family and the rationale is jealousy or anger. It is across the board in all cultures. At its core is an assumption of a 'right' to that woman. She was 'his' and she had the audacity to leave.

Selfish, selfish bastard.

Women kill their children a lot more than men, but when this happens women try to think of excuses for them. They'll say, "She's depressed" or some other such nonsense. Sometimes a man is leaving a marriage and a woman kills herself and the kids so he can't have them.



Andrea Yates, Nicole Waring, Leatrice Brewer, Susan Smith, Michelle Kehoe, Gilberta Estrada, Viviane Gamor, Veronique Courjault, Jeanmarie Tolle Geis, Banita Jacks, Joanne Hill, Hope Orwick, Frances Elaine Campione, etc... all murdered their children.

Let's all laugh and point at the misogynist! :rolleyes:

Wow.

Or both men and women are capable of doing tremendously fucked up things.

Postpartum depression is extremely well-documented Radar. Let's give you that kind of hormonal swing and see if you turn into an asshole.

Oh wait.

:lol:

From The Economist of 18 Dec 2008 in "Darwinism Why we are, as we are":

So true, Dana and pierce are right, as well as UT and tw's thoughts.

[sidenote to UT and tw's posts] - I began a little over a year ago experiencing the uncontrollable emotional mood swings that my usually very loving "better half" started having.
Now this is perimenopausal, and I/we were totally flabbergasted by them. Soul-mates who love each others company, but in these monthly times she experiences horrendous emotions sometimes.
Believe me when I say I was shocked!!
I understand she can't control her feelings that arise and am very proud of her and the effort she puts into controlling her actions and spoken words when they do.

I think she appreciates my understanding as limited as it is. My heart hurts for her and the struggles she goes through and I try to keep from causing her more grief.

And although such situations can be understood, of course this doesn't let off the hook legally any crimes a woman, as well as a man commits in such emotional times.

But I've seen the tough struggles that an extremely loving and giving woman is going through, up close and first-hand. I think I may have said it before- try as I do, I'll never be able to match her giving heart.

We seem to have different statistics in this country.
Perhaps because of the safety net? Of course it doesn't always work - I am not suggesting that no mothers kill their children in England.

From The Telegraph (I have edited)

Wow. Thanks for that Sundae. That was really interesting.

From the same article:


Given the importance these men place on family and their role as provider and possessor, it does make me wonder how much of this is biological (leading to this particular resopnse to jealousy) and how much is cultural (gender identities that exclude some men from the coping strategiesother men and most women have access to.)

I know it's a serious topic, but this made me snicker out loud. I guess sleeve-chopping is a typical British woman's display of anger?

It's one of the ones you hear about - that and the paint thrown over the car/ precious records sold on eBay etc.

Despite the facts and medical opinions cited in the article, it's still only the work of a journalist after all.

I'd like to laugh and point at the misogynist, but nobody in this thread, including me, has made a misogynistic statement. What I said is no more misogynistic than the statement Dana made was misandristic.

Postpartum depression may be real, but blaming depression on murdering your kids is as ridiculous as a man saying he killed his kids because he was horny and his hormones were off or a woman using the excuse that PMS made her murder her husband.

Sundae's stats don't prove anything. Stats vary widely from one country to another.

TW's quote from the economists seems to support what I've said. The presence of a step-father increases the odds of an "unnatural death", but this could be suicide, drunk driving, doing drugs with other kids, etc. It does nothing to suggest that the step father is killing the kids.

The second sentence of his quote says that murder of children is often by the mother which leans towards supporting what I've said about seeing more stories in the news about women murdering their own kids than men doing so. Step-fathers don't count.

Here's an article that says women are more likely to kill their kids, but when men do murder their kids, they also include the wife.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/Story?id=3435710&page=1

True.
Figures for the US please.
Actually you said:
Not the same thing at all.

Sadly, the article does not include any figures.
I am willing to accept that more mothers murder their own children in the US than fathers do, as all I was trying to do was back up Dana's British opinion. But if you are going to include facts I'd prefer it if they show actual statistics. We all know journalists are headline seeking.

I wouldn't know where to get such data.

The main point of my statement saying that women kill their kids more, is to point out the hypocrisy that when Andrea Yates (a woman who should be slowly lowered into a wood chipper an inch at a time) murdered her 5 kids, insane American women were blaming her husband and whining about postpartum depression when if a man committed the same crime, they'd be demanding that he get strung up by his balls.

There is no bond greater than that between children and their mother. This is why there is no betrayal more great than when a mother murders her kids and why I find it even more offensive than when a man does it. And trust me, when a man does it, I want him to suffer horrific pain for every single day remaining of his life and hope that he gets the death penalty in some extremely painful way after being gang raped repeatedly by big dudes with AIDS.

Looks like in cases where the parent kills themselves after the kids, there are more male perpetrators.

Interestingly, most of the children killed are male, and most of the offenders are male, according to the bureau of justice statistics. If the child is killed by someone other than a parent, those offenders are 81% male.

Women killing their kids is such a horrifying thing to us, that it must get more press, or we remember the incidences more strongly.

There. Right there, in bold is probably the most illuminating thing you've said in a long time Radar. This is also a likely reason for the disproportionate level of interest the media takes in female infanticides. In the UK, though more fathers kill their children than do mothers, there is more coverage in the media of those mothers than of murdering fathers. If the father's crime is particularly violent, the children's fate particularly heart-rending, or contains enough salacious details like a supposed affair, or messy divorce, or even better, if it's an honour killing with pizazz, the media is all over it. But most of the fathers who kill their children warrant little more than a headline in the local rag.

A woman though? A woman who kills her baby? Well that just about flies in the face if everything we believe ourselves to be. The trouble is Radar, that not all mothers have that sacred bond, that glowing line mystically connecting mother and child. It just doesn't happen for some. And that's a hell of a lot more common than you might think. Now for some of those new mum's that bond will be established, just a little later and with a little counselling, or support. For some it doesn't. Is her crime still more heinous than his?

And post-partum depression isn't an excuse it's a medical condition. That it might be misused as an excuse in some cases doesn't stop it being true in others. I'm a woman, I get the hormones thing, i understand; but I don't understand that level of hormonal flux, nor ever will, unless I have a child. That woman's body grew another person you don't think that's going to have serious chemical implications in her body? So much of what we do and think is governed by chemical activity in the brain.

This is something I've tried to explain to my friends without children, mostly to no avail. The hormones, they do any number of things without my consent. My boobs leak when I hear my baby cry. That is a physical, chemical, hormonal reaction that is completely out of my control. If the chemicals became imbalanced, who knows what I'd feel? I'm certain I'd have no say in it, one way or the other.

Post Partum Depression is a real thing. It is a valid excuse for extreme behavior in many woman. It is not a fantasy.

It's very humbling to come to understand how much of what you think and feel and do is controlled by chemicals/hormones.

Wasn't Andrea Yates hearing voices? Clearly mentally ill. The mentally ill need treatment, not punishment. Kept away from society for the rest of their life? Probably necessary also.

Yea, when I read about the details of that case it makes me cringe. It was avoidable. It may be a larger symptom of our failed/failing mental health safety net in this country. It is going to get worse. Our state just announced planned cuts to an already underfunded system. Sad. We are going to see many more of the mentally ill end up in a prison system without treatment.

What is apparent: women killing their children is not misogyny. It is a real problem that is apparently only recently been taken seriously. So much for a popular myth that women would not kill their kids due to some magical or inherited bond. Two threats to a child’s life come from the genetic mother and from step fathers.

Meanwhile, the Economist summary of this problem also noted another fact. These deaths most often occur among the lower classes. Of course, some will cry racist or double standard or whatever. The fact remains from research – this is where parents tends to be the greatest threat to a less than 5 year old child’s life expectancy.

I read it every two weeks as well. it is not a medical journal and cannot support your notion that you have any understanding of the issue because you read it. As with most things.

I don't believe insanity is a valid defense or excuse and neither is being mentally retarded or chemically imbalanced. If she was crazy, fine. Don't tell her it's the electric chair. Tell her it's a roller coaster. Either way she's got to go.

The only thing I've ever seen you display a firm understanding of is deep frying a turkey, so you may want to re-think your attack on tw.

But those two aren't the only options, consider the two-fold benefits of Soylent Green.

Good point. I would consider it for illegal aliens but the mentally ill need treatment.

First off, Radar that's totally fucked up. If someone doesn't have control over their faculties and actions then they cannot be held responsible for them.

Secondly, you can't not tell her its the electric chair, because you cannot legally execute someobody who is not aware of what's happening and why. There was a famous case about a decade ago (I can't recall the details) in which a severely mentally disturbed man was convicted of murder. He had, I believe, a very severe form of schizophrenia whch was partially controllable by medication. For some reason, I think he had no health insurance, though probably it was as much to do with his inability to function alone, he had stopped taking his meds and ended up killing someone.

This man was really out of it. He was sentenced to death and there was a legal requirement that he be medicated prior to the execution in order that he understand that he was being executed and why. After all, it is a punishment. If he is out of it, then he is unaware of his death and there is no punishment, merely a death.

Personally, I was really upset by the reports of that case. It stayed with me for a long time. Somewhere along the line, someone should have been ensuring that this young man stay on his medication. Someone should have been ensuring that he had somewhere safe and stable to stay. It is no surprise that when we abandon the mentally ill to the tender mercies of Care in the Community, many become a threat to themselves and some to themselves and others. That young man, just like the woman who was hearing voices, was executed because the system failed them.

Dana, you're free to consider it fucked up, but that's how I feel. I don't care why you murder people. I don't care about your reasons. I don't care about your mental state. I don't care if you were aware of what you were doing. I don't care if you are insane, on drugs, mentally retarded, or hormonal.

If you murder people, you've got to die. End of story.

But isn't the person killing the killer also a killer?

No, executioner.

What you're suggesting there, is that motive and circumstance are irrelevant. I can understand that perspective. Except that you've already made clear that actually motive and circumstance do matter to you. You consider it more offensive for a mother to kill her child than a father. If circumstance and motive are irrelevent, then it shouldn't matter whether it's the mother or the father, it should offend you no more or less.

Correct

Personally I think circumstance and motive are very relevant. It might not be relevant for the person who died. But then again the justice system (as indeed our burial rites) are not there for the dead, they're there for the living, us. Some murders are both a fatal attack on an individual, and a violent attack against a larger group, or against the things we as a society hold dear. Hence 'hate crimes'. Matters not one jot to the person who dies that they were killed for the colour of their skin, but it matters to us. To our society. The actual murder is not different. It's more like there's also an auxillary, more general crime against wider society.

From what he's argued, I gather that Radar doesn't think it matters why someone kills, only that they have killed. I think it matters why. A crime of passion is not the same as a sociopathic murder, nor a political assassination, nor a murder for financial gain. All those things are different.

By that logic some murders are more offensive than others. Personally, I am far less 'offended' by the father who kills his child out of a misguided but altruistic desire to save that child from something. The ones who have decided to kill themselves and think it kinder to take the family with them. They're utterly tragic. Usually not in a sane state of mind. That to me is deeply sad. But it doesn't offend me the way the jealous father does. The one that kills his children to punish his estranged wife, for instance. The one that kills his family because if he can't have them, nobody can.

It's not about the gender of the killer. It's about motives and reason. But the figures seem to suggest that the parent murdering purely for selfish concerns is more likely to be male. Mothers who kill are usually mentally disturbed. A parent (male or female) who knowngly and logically plans and carries out the murder of their own child is far more offensive to me than someone who lost the plot and did something terrible whilst they were not mentally competant.

Thats where you part ways. Its easier to just say "You take a life = you die." That reduces the excuses and all. I know it gets complicated in other ways, but in theory.
Its not about the motives at all - its about the act.


*note OMG - am I defending radar here? Shit I'm scaring myself now.

Which is why you will never hold an elected office and fail to understand human nature. You fail.

You take a life by accident (ex: car wreck)? You take a life defending yourself? You take a life defending your family? You take a life defending our citizens?

Then you should die, no matter the circumstances under which it happened.

Over. Out.

You'll have to ask radar that one, mtp.

You agreed with him. You can't defend your own opinion?

I think you're point is a very stupid one. I can defend myself just fine thanks. I've been doing it here for longer than you've been around - mmmkay?

My point is: why should I ask Radar specifically when you agreed with him? You don't know what you agreed to or why? I was asking you, and you don't have an answer to the question? If you can defend yourself, why aren't you? Did you just realize your point is stupid and am now attacking me, to pull attention away from your stupid narrow minded post?

How is her point stupid? You made a statement and when she responded to it you refuse to defend it. Hell I should start agreeing with some extremely ridiculous statements and then when someone beats me in argument I can just say it was someone else's argument, talk to them. If you don't want to defend yourself, don't post something.