Posted on 08/01/2012 11:21:12 PM PDT by dennisw
James Holmes came to the attention of the threat assessment committee at the University of Colorado but no further action was taken because he left the school more than a month before the attack that killed 12 and injured 58, sources told ABC News.
ABC News has learned that Dr. Lynne Fenton, the psychiatrist who was treating Holmes, 24, at the school, was also a key member of the university's threat assessment team. The group of experts were responsible for protecting the school from potentially violent students.
KMGH-TV, ABC News' affiliate in Denver, reported exclusively that, according to sources, by early June, Fenton had informed other members of the team about her concerns regarding Holmes.
But on June 10 -- three days after Holmes bought an assault weapon and added it to his already growing arsenal -- he suddenly told the university that he was dropping out of the neurosciences doctoral program with no explanation.
KMGH-TV reported last week that he'd purchased the weapon hours after failing a key oral exam.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
That’s not what I meant. The parents in the Pines family were not mentally ill. The father was a successful medical doctor, the mother was a prominent attorney. They were neglectful, selfish parents. They divorced. The father kept the children and married a prostitute. She was abusive and mentally cruel to the younger son. The older one was already away at boarding school. What she did to the child, compounded by his parents’ indifference, caused the boy - who was brilliant - to go mad. Biology had nothing to do with it.
Could be. In the meantime, his pictures from the courtroom show him looking dazed, confused, and clueless about everything going on around him -- almost like Nancy Pelosi does.
That too. I was thinking more in terms of doubling the number of households with each divorce and all that includes. We generally go from ONE of everything to TWO of everything; living quarters, vehicles, refrigerators, big screens, you name it.
Verily. But speaking what many have concluded to be the unvarnished truth on this forum will not likely win you any Dale Carnegie awards.
Give him my best and tell him not to trust ANYBODY; even his own counsel. "You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy."
I agree with that point. Credit where credit is due.
Still, her eyes are strange in appearance.
What is “old” is “new” again.
Look at the lighting in the photo. It is from above and slightly behind. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t bright out, but there is no direct light in her face. (So why squint?)
It does smell of CYA to me. It may even be true, but the University, the Department, and those involved are definitely trying to provide preemptive exculpatory material.
Hiding what is within?
LLS
Maybe that's what struck me as odd. If you look at the light on her hair, you realize the light isn't in her eyes.
That set off my Fauxtography alarms from waay back in the days of green helmet guy.
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.