If you have any understanding of the way academia works, it's more likely he passed along a graduate research project to his next graduate/research assistant. Completely hypothetical, but possible scenario: The shooter probably thought it was "his" code, but depending on if he was in grad school under some kind of program where he was employed by UCLA as a graduate assistant, research assistant, teaching assistant, etc. then he may have thought he owned the work he was doing, but he didn't. Just about every university has intellectual property contracts they have employees sign that state whatever the terms are governing whether intellectual property you develop as an employee of the university belongs to the university or to you. Hint: it usually ain't you.
That’s interesting information. I wonder, though, if people in academia don’t feel like they have some proprietorship in an other than legal sense — the idea that, yes, I can’t make any money off this, but as I’ve put work into it I ought to be able to publish or make my dissertation or get further grants for it. Even where the law is clear, the etiquette can be pretty complicated.