Leaving: Having cheerful conversation. Full head of hair. Alert.
Coming back: Same van. Shaved head. Doped out of his mind.
Same day. Same clothes. Mark on forehead
This is exactly the MO for Jihadis.
Posted on 08/20/2009 12:17:46 AM PDT by nickcarraway
Family gives permission for release
Recently discovered mental health records contain no obvious indications that the Virginia Tech gunman was a year and a half away from committing the worst mass shootings in modern U.S. history.
The records contain previously unseen handwritten notes from the counselors who talked to Seung-Hui Cho in 2005, and in one report Cho denied having any suicidal or homicidal thoughts. On April 16, 2007, Cho killed 32 students and faculty members on the Blacksburg, Va., campus and took his own life.
The counselors' notes indicate they were concerned for the troubled student, but the records don't contain any evidence that they saw serious warning signs to believe Cho would commit violence. The files were released Wednesday, nearly five weeks after the missing records were discovered at the home of Robert Miller, the former director of the university's counseling center.
Va. Tech Gunman Slipped Through Cracks in Health Care System
The files, which cover all of Cho's interactions with the center during November and December 2005, were released by Virginia Tech after Cho's family gave permission for the release. Permission was needed due to privacy laws. The records recently were discovered among MIller's personal files. According to a statement released by Miller's attorney, the records were removed inadvertently from the Cook Counseling Center when Miller was reassigned to a different department early in 2006. Virginia Tech said the files consist of paper records of Cho's two telephone interactions with professionals at the counseling center prior to his hospitalization at Carilion St. Albans Hospital and his appointment at the Cook Counseling Center following his release from the hospital. Cho denied the homicidal thoughts in a session with counselor Sherry Lynch Conrad on Dec. 14, 2005. On April 16, 2007, Cho killed 32 students and faculty members on campus and took his own life Cho met with Conrad at Cook Counseling Center after being detained in a mental hospital overnight because he had expressed thoughts of suicide.
"He denies suicidal and/or homicidal thoughts. Said the comment he made was a joke. Says he has no reason to harm self and would never do it," Conrad wrote. That was Cho's last contact with the counseling center. The counselor wrote that she gave him emergency contact numbers and encouraged him to return the next semester in January, but he didn't make an appointment. "My mother, father and I all agree that it is the correct thing to do to release the newly discovered medical records of my brother," Cho's sister, Sun Cho, said in a letter authorizing the release. The university said the recovered records are consistent with information already contained in the Virginia Tech Review Panel Report and in the report by the Virginia Inspector General for Behavioral Health and Developmental Services provided to the review panel. Cho committed suicide after killing 32 students and faculty members in a dormitory and classroom building on the Blacksburg campus on April 16, 2007.
View The Records:
Records in possession of the Cook Counseling Center since 2005: Click Here
Records in possession of Dr. Robert Miller and returned to Virginia Tech last month: Click Here
Er, that's probably why - the records are from 18 months BEFORE the shooting. A lot can happen in 18 months.
Well the way I read it in the NT, the Devil entered into Judas pretty quick. No subtle warnings really that anyone but Jesus could see.
Since the devil entered into Judas, does that mean he still went to hell when he killed himself, or do you get a pass if the devil is in you, when you do that? Just curious. I’ve often wondered this...
I am willing to bet the whole shebang that Cho was recruited by the nearby islamic whackos, trained, drugged, and set loose. I studied that whole thing 24/7 for weeks and weeks.
He was a perfect recruit for them. Alienated, a loner looking for a purpose, and a need to be noticed.
I have a whole series of files on this including all the photographs, family background and all.
Very little attention was paid to the FACT that Al Qaeda took credit for it within hours after it happened.
Ismail Ax was conveniently and purposely defined as everything except the obvious. Couldn’t blame muslims for this, now, could we?
Let’s just get national open-carry and then it’s all even.
We HAVE national open carry. It’s called the Second Amendment.
If you need to be medicated to get through your day, you can forfeit your right to a gun.
And any "mental health counselor" who fails to safeguard the American public should be criminally liable.
This is exactly the MO for Jihadis.
Am I the only one who thinks that the fact that one of the victims was a professor who was a Holocaust survivor was NOT a coincidence?
Wait, think about that.
A mental case would not forgo acquiring a firearm because it was illegal for them. They are a mental case.
Why was such an obvious connection so wilfully covered up? The “mosque” in Virginia was a terrorist stopover for the 9/11 murderers.
If you dig deep enough, and I have, you will find that 2 of the latest mass shooters BOTH had ties to islamics who “befriended” them when “no one else would.”
That doesn’t include the obvious shooter at the recruiting Center.
I agree, except that telling people how they have to carry is an infringement.
Truth to Power.
Keeps the psychiatrists from allowing armed psychotics to walk free among us.
And what would prevent the psycho from buying a gun on the street ?
Nothing. But since the psychiatrist would be criminally liable, we might see a little less of this stuff.
Subject: Is that what Frasier would do ?
“prescribing physician would be responsible for registering...”
I’m just curious to see if others might analyze the logic of this thread in a way similar to what I am thinking...
So this registration - will accomplish something ? Keep that crazy kid from killing someone ? Are you preventing him from acquiring a bow & arrow, knives, rocks, baseball bats, poisons, homemade bombs ?
Would the registration make him take a solemn vow to never do anything violent ? Perhaps we could implant a gps in him and send real-time data to an analysis center and red-flag situations where he might be in the wrong place at the wrong time, like in a gun store or in a cabin in the woods or at a gas station. Technically possible, but I leave it as an exercise to the reader to list out the ways that this is as disgusting as it is technically preposterous.
We might ask ourselves how we would you feel if WE were the psychiatrist - would we want to report this fellow and then go on treating him, after giving him the prescription that he knows has branded him as “dangerous” ? Would we want him to know where our office was ? Perhaps we felt it was not a wild stretch of the imagination that he might kill someone, but as long as he took his medication, we’d feel comfortable being around him, because we felt the chance was very remote. Certainly, if we felt he might go on a spree imminently we would notify the authorities. But we couldn’t just lock up every patient we had that might possibly have violent tendencies, right ?
I gather most of us feel that we are center or right politically, or some combination, which is great, but this really exemplifies the CINO / RINO dilemma: you’re either for personal responsibility or not. It’s a real simple line of logic:
A) deadly weapons of all kinds are here to stay, they can’t be un-invented
B) everyone has a right to self-defense, be it from an attack by a criminal or an attack by a tyrannical government (look up the American Revolution for information concerning that right)
C) criminals can always get their hands on deadly weapons
D) each of us makes a choice to either stand up for ourselves and our freedom, or we yield to fear and live under the yoke of someone bullying us
The hypothetical “psycho”, as typified by the VA college shooter kid, needs to be promptly tried. If convicted, he needs to have a prompt appeal available. If upheld, and no Constitutional issues are involved, said convicted killer needs to be promptly executed.
And, as in all prior history of the world, up until the past few decades, if a bystander kills this killer while he is in the process of killing others, said bystander needs to be given a medal.
This process, correctly and justly administered, results in every member of society knowing that they can’t “game” the system, and play on people’s “feelings” and get some easy punishment, or let go, like this rat that was let go in Scotland, which reflects a complete misunderstanding of what’s going on in the world on the part of some intellectuals in positions of responsibility.
“Registrations” do absolutely zero, nada, zilch, nichts, nothing to influence the actions of those would commit murder, i.e., unjustified homicide. And, for the truly deranged, no threat of punishment will deter them. For them, the above described procedure merely winds up executing them at the end, thus ensuring they are not going to kill again.
There is no way to completely eliminate random killings by crazy people, but most certainly, passing new law after new law simply adds another bureaucratic registration process to our already enormous and obsolete bureaucracy.
Yeah. Allow me to repeat. The prescribing physician will be legally liable for allowing a psychotic to walk free among innocent people while the patient's symptoms are masked by drugs and the knowledge of their capacity for evil is hidden within patient files.
If you need to be medicated to get through your day, you shouldn't have a gun. And if the treating physician sees fit to send a psychotic out among free people, that physician is criminally liable for any harm done to others.
The patient signs a release knowingly relinquishing their rights to a firearm. The physician is on the hook to provide adequate safeguards for the rest of us.
While that may be the most practical, how does that square with the Second Amendment?
Don’t really know. Convicted felons can’t buy firearms, so I suppose there are limits imposed other than what we’re discussing here.
Civil or Criminal liability ?
Criminal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.