patrick.net

Dorner was mentally ill and irrational. You can't expect inner dialogue on moral hazard from a mentally ill individual.

Did he get shafted by the LAPD?
Maybe, but so do many others. That is what Tort Law is for.

Did the police act with the appropriate restraint in capturing him? It doesn't look like it.

Did he make them scared by going after them?
Definately.

There were many curious twists and turns in this drama, you can't expect predictable behavior from someone who has snapped though.

Dorner did not seem to have any desire to hurt anyone but his "high value targets."

The only danger faced by civilians was a hail of bullets, coming from police, if the civilian happened to be driving vehicle that kinda-sorta looked like it might be Dorners.

divingengineer says

Dorner was mentally ill and irrational. You can't expect inner dialogue on moral hazard from a mentally ill individual.

It's as if you have a window to my soul.

leo707 says

Dorner did not seem to have any desire to hurt anyone but his "high value targets."

The only danger faced by civilians was a hail of bullets, coming from police, if the civilian happened to be driving vehicle that kinda-sorta looked like it might be Dorners.

This 27 year old was a civilian and her boyfriend who was killed had no connection to anything.

They guy was nuts - he snapped. He was living inside a conspiracy theory and, as such, found a connection that worked for him. He then killed innocent people.

Mind you, had he killed the people responsible for his firing, he still would have "killed innocent people". His response was far too serious. But then again, he was nuttier than a fruitcake.

From what I read, he was considered to be a highly intelligent over-acheiver of sorts. That, too, is common for people with mental illnesses.

His fatal error was not seeking treatment for his mental health issues (common, because many MI people don't acknowledge something is wrong enough to seek treatment and our mental health system is severely lacking).

Look at OJ Simpson - the guy thought he was bullet proof and since he had loads of money, he skated free each time. Until the last robbery that landed him in jail, he lived by different rules and people bowed to him.

lostand confused says

This 27 year old was a civilian and her boyfriend who was killed had no connection to anything.

You mean daughter of former LAPD Capt. Randy Quan (one of the people that Dorner primarily blamed for his firing), and her fiance?

Yes, they did have a direct connection to anger in Dorner's manifesto and he did promise to kill family of police officers.

elliemae says

They guy was nuts - he snapped. He was living inside a conspiracy theory and, as such, found a connection that worked for him.

Not everyone who commits murder is crazy, unless you want to define murder as a crazy act. His manifesto was probably the most lucid and well reasoned manifesto that I have ever read--not that the bar was too high.

While I agree that he certainly over reacted, and the conspiracy was not a big as he imagined, he had a lot more evidence for a conspiracy than almost any popular conspiracy theory out there. Christ, the 71 year-old woman shot in the back by cops for driving a truck that kinda looked like Dorner's was the exact type of thing he was complaining about.

elliemae says

That, too, is common for people with mental illnesses.

He certainly suffered from depression, but I don't know if there was any mental illness beyond that, and yes he should have sought treatment for that.

elliemae says

Mind you, had he killed the people responsible for his firing, he still would have "killed innocent people". His response was far too serious.

Everyone he killed or shot was innocent, and did not deserve to die. I don't think he killed anyone who he directly blamed for his persecution.
However, he did follow a logic to his killings and seemed to have "rules" on who was a valid target. He did have several opportunities to kill others that were not on his official hit list, and even though it would have been advantageous for him to do so he chose not to.

I suggest we stop calling non-police persons "civilians".

I think the police in this country already have acquired entirely too much of a military mindset. And the the terminology of "civilians" is part of it.

Let's call them citizens, Americans, the public, or just "people".

justme says

I suggest we stop calling non-police persons "civilians".

I like the spirit of what you are saying, but it is difficult for me to breakout of my dictionary fundamentalist mindset.

ci·vil·ian
noun
1. a person who is not on active duty with a military, naval, police, or fire fighting organization.
2. Informal. anyone regarded by members of a profession, interest group, society, etc., as not belonging; nonprofessional; outsider: We need a producer to run the movie studio, not some civilian from the business world.
3. a person versed in or studying Roman or civil law.
adjective
4. of, pertaining to, formed by, or administered by civilians.

I agree that Dorner was an evil man. His actions did not manifest overnight. He was like this for years. I bet his exgirlfriend could confirm that.

justme says

I suggest we stop calling non-police persons "civilians".

I think the police in this country already have acquired entirely too much of a military mindset. And the the terminology of "civilians" is part of it.

Let's call them citizens, Americans, the public, or just "people".

I think the proper term you are looking for is "Mundane."

Dorner is systemic of the police departments all around America.
It's not the Police department, it's people that work for them, that feel so entitled to that job, that they can justify going on a gun rampage, and it be the departments fault, if they get fired. It pays shit, it's a job riddled with more inter personnel politics, procedures and guidelines.

They aren't there for the good against evil fight, they are there to enforce civil code. They are not the town sheriff of days long gone, that would tell the rowdy town drunk to go home and sleep it off.

Dorner wasn't a hero, he was a wake up call for the type of people police departments hire. They should hire human beings that are there to protect the public from bad guys, instead of finding ways to criminalize every "CIVILIAN" they come in contact with.

But that's more about policy and revenue than it is their fault. But the Dorner types are ideal for enforcing those laws, as they think they are doing a "COOL" job, not protecting the public from the bad guys.

Take that job away from them, they all don't become Dorners, but many do enter Criminal enterprises. Many news headlines in South Florida, about drug rings, burglar rings, robberies, Prostitution rings, Organized fraud rackets, have a retired or ex-cops involved.

leo707 says

I like the spirit of what you are saying, but it is difficult for me to breakout of my dictionary fundamentalist mindset.

Yeah, but on the other hand I bet there is more than one dictionary that sticks to the traditional definition: not an active member of militia or armed forces :-)

Dictionaries are like religious texts, you can always find one to agree with :-)

leo707 says

You mean daughter of former LAPD Capt. Randy Quan (one of the people that
Dorner primarily blamed for his firing), and her fiance?

Yes, they did have a direct connection to anger in Dorner's manifesto and he
did promise to kill family of police officers.

So by this logic, if you do something wrong, it is ok for the affected person to take it out on your kids?? His manifesto was the rantings of a madman.

The LAPD may have its issue, but this man is psycho.

You alls just don't wanna see what's a coming.

Yes, the man was crazy.

However, until you have lived inside a conspiracy theory, where someone is out to get you, I don't think that ya'll can understand how devastating it can be.

If someone is out to get you - in his case, the LAPD - you lose the ability to earn a living and your reputation is shot. It's up to you to clear your name, but no one believes you. Whistleblowers are viewed as vindictive, painted as traitors when they are often trying to do what's right. There's "right," and then there's what's easiest.

Of course, most whistleblowers don't go on a rampage, kill people and hold an entire community hostage.

I think Mr. Dorner has classic symptoms of narcissism

Narcissistic criteria

The grandiosity section of the Diagnostic Interview for Narcissism (DIN) (Second edition) is as follows:[3]

The person exaggerates talents, capacity and achievements in an unrealistic way.
The person believes in his/her invulnerability or does not recognize his/her limitations.
The person has grandiose fantasies.
The person believes that he/she does not need other people.
The person overexamines and downgrades other people, projects, statements, or dreams in an unrealistic manner.
The person regards himself/herself as unique or special when compared to other people.
The person regards himself/herself as generally superior to other people.
The person behaves self-centeredly and/or self-referentially.
The person behaves in a boastful or pretentious way.

ETA:

Securely buttressed by such self-beliefs, 'in a grandiose identity...all that is unpleasant to my self-image I can ditch. I can look down my nose with contempt at the childlike ways of my fellows, and I can get rid of my infantile self by pushing somewhere'[4] outside myself. However the downside to putting myself into a grandiose state is that 'the grandiose self is extremely vulnerable, and...if something does not go my way, I make a great fuss, because I am a king who has been frustrated'.[5]

lostand confused says

So by this logic, if you do something wrong, it is ok for the affected person to take it out on your kids??

Yes, for 1000s of years people and organizations have been hurting families of people they want to see suffer using that kind of logic.

It is a common part of the human condition to blame family members for the crimes/sins of another family member. It is not that large of a logical jump to want to make people suffer through their families and/or make family members suffer for the crimes (imagined or real) of their kin.

Horrible? yes.

Immoral? yes.

It is fair? no.

Psychotic? Sure sometimes, but targeting families is not the exclusive domain of the psychopath.

lostand confused says

The LAPD may have its issue, but this man is psycho.

Seriously? Are we talking about the same LAPD that shot down (fortunately she survived) an, entirely innocent and unrelated, old cleaning lady in their pursuit of Dorner? Do you really think that the shoot first, second, third and then fourth check your target culture of the LAPD has not committed crimes equal to or even surpassing those of Dorner?

Yes, Dorner probably murdered an innocent couple in cold blood, in no way did they deserve to be killed. If found guilty (he probably was) Dorner should have certainly been punished for those crimes. Could Dorner have done a lot worse to his victims? Hell yes. Do you think that the LAPD has not harassed, stalked, tortured, raped, and murdered entirely innocent people?

Sure sometimes they get caught...
http://raniakhalek.com/2013/02/07/lapd-officer-accused-of-rape-faces-a-separate-lawsuit-for-beating-a-man-nearly-to-death/

...but, for each criminal caught how many do you think are going free, never to be punished?

MsBennet says

I think Mr. Dorner has classic symptoms of narcissism

It would have been nice if you listed reasons why you thought Dorner met the classic symptoms.

Granted my source is just having read his manifesto, but a lot of the items on the list don't seem to apply to him.

MsBennet says

The person exaggerates talents, capacity and achievements in an unrealistic way.

****Mr. Dorner apparently does not know how to tie up hostages. Also he had an unremarkable stint in the military, yet he wants everyone to believe his a Rambo of sorts

The person believes in his/her invulnerability or does not recognize his/her limitations.

***Dorner thought he knew how to steal a boat and apparently did not. His car apparently caught on fire (the one he meticulously polished, so it looked good on the outside anyway) perhaps due to erratic driving (and no one was chasing him at that point.)

The person has grandiose fantasies.

****That somehow killing innocent people would "make the world care" about his problems.

The person believes that he/she does not need other people.

*** He was doing this solo like Rambo.

The person overexamines and downgrades other people, projects, statements, or dreams in an unrealistic manner.

*****He downgraded his superior by accusing her of doing something wrong and then insisted on sticking to his story and a court found him to be wrong. He also downgraded the LAPD for being racist, etc.

The person regards himself/herself as unique or special when compared to other people.

****He was outraged he was fired from the LAPD because he was "born to be a cop."

The person regards himself/herself as generally superior to other people.

****He regarded himself as superior to his own boss and tattled on his boss.

The person behaves self-centeredly and/or self-referentially.

****Killing people because you lost your job, that pretty self-centered. Immediately after killing he fled to Mexico to try to get away and save his own skin.

The person behaves in a boastful or pretentious way.

***He boasted how he was going to take all his targets out with his superior skills and humongous amounts of ammo

Thanks for the reply, the others I agree with if not for your reasoning then for others.

MsBennet says

The person believes in his/her invulnerability or does not recognize his/her limitations.

While Dorner certainly "exaggerates talents, capacity and achievements", he also did not believe in his own invulnerability and realized that he would be caught and killed eventually. I think the he did not imagine it would be so quickly.

MsBennet says

The person has grandiose fantasies.

****That somehow killing innocent people would "make the world care" about his problems.

Not, really. His intent was to terrorize the LAPD into looking into his case and to get independent media looking into his claims. The killings were his last resort to bring attention to his case.

MsBennet says

The person believes that he/she does not need other people.

*** He was doing this solo like Rambo.

Yes, he acted on his own, but his manifesto mentions other that helped him in life and thanked them for their support. He not only recognized a need for others, but he appreciated them for their help. A very non-psychopathic trait.

MsBennet says

The person overexamines and downgrades other people, projects, statements, or dreams in an unrealistic manner.

*****He downgraded his superior by accusing her of doing something wrong and then insisted on sticking to his story and a court found him to be wrong. He also downgraded the LAPD for being racist, etc.

If it were true would you stick with your story even if courts ruled against you? Did he downgrade? sure. More than an average person would downgrade? probably not. He also had a lot of positive things so say about people, projects, and statements. You can't diagnose someone based on a few statements, especially when there are plenty of statements made that go against the diagnosis.

MsBennet says

The person regards himself/herself as unique or special when compared to other people.


****He was outraged he was fired from the LAPD because he was "born to be a cop."

Once again, he felt that being a cop was his calling, but he also felt that lots of other people were "special" and "unique" as well. Does everyone how feels that they are well suited to their careers/jobs, and perform at a high level deserve a diagnosis as narcissist?

MsBennet says

The person regards himself/herself as generally superior to other people.

****He regarded himself as superior to his own boss and tattled on his boss.

Once again there were lots of people that Dorner looked up to as role models. Yes, he "tattled" on his boss when he was being ignored. If you witnessed an abuse at work would you stay silent? Would you go further up the food chain if your boss ignored your reports of abuse? Dorner was a whistle blower and when through the unfortunate strain that most whistle blowers go trough, and unfortunately it broke him. He was well aware that he had been broken.

MsBennet says

The person behaves in a boastful or pretentious way.

***He boasted how he was going to take all his targets out with his superior skills and humongous amounts of ammo

It is just speculation, but I think a lot of the boasting was part of his effort to terrorize the LAPD into reopening his case. Also, he did seem to have "superior" shooting skills and additional urban warfare training compared to most LAPD officers.

Leo, sounds like you just want to counter everything I said just for argument's sake. I sure hope you don't think this man acted in a normal manner. He will be proven to have a personality disorder of some sort and you can be sure of that. All of my points were accurate (and I can think of plenty more but don't want to waste my time reciting them here.) But apparently you enjoy the tit for tat.

Oh, I just found this link. I will let the professional say it:

One person taking a closer look is Joe Navarro, an ex-police officer who became one of the youngest agents recruited to the FBI. He spent more than 25 years as a counterintelligence agent catching spies.

Navarro, who we spoke to by phone, says he believes that Dorner is a very flawed individual with personality and character disorders; that he has an overvaluation of self and devalues others.

Basically, he's a pathological narcissist, Navarro says.

"It's amazing how much is in the manifesto," he told FOX 11. "One gets a sense about his personality and his character, and we begin to sense that this individual is very ego-centric, very narcissistic; has a high sense of himself, a high sense of entitlement."

Read more: http://www.myfoxla.com/story/21085769/ex-fbi-agent-chris-donner-is-a#ixzz2LwO3zTGR

MsBennet says

Leo, sounds like you just want to counter everything I said just for argument's sake.

No, I do agree that Dorner exhibits some of the traits of a narcissist, but then again a lot of people do but because they do not check enough of the boxes they are not actual narcissists. I just don't see that.

MsBennet says

I sure hope you don't think this man acted in a normal manner.

No, what he did was not "normal", but his feelings and the motivations that caused him to act seem within the "normal" realm. As I have made clear in my posts, this does not justify his actions or make them morally "right."

MsBennet says

All of my points were accurate (and I can think of plenty more but don't want to waste my time reciting them here.)

Yes, your points were more or less accurate, but I don't think they told the whole picture. It is very easy to watch moments of someones life, pick and choose behaviors, then diagnose them with all sorts of horrible crippling mental illnesses.

This is very much like Psych 101 Syndrome, where after taking one psychology course students tend to then diagnose all their friends and family members with debilitating mental illnesses.

MsBennet says

He will be proven to have a personality disorder of some sort and you can be sure of that.

Yes, this may be the case, but unlike other spree killers it does not seem to me like an immediate open-and-shut case of mental illness.

I am not so sure that an actual non-sensationalized diagnosis is an inevitability...

MsBennet says

One person taking a closer look is Joe Navarro, an ex-police officer who became one of the youngest agents recruited to the FBI.

Yes, Navarro has an interesting and unique perspective on Dorner, but...Navarro is not a psychologist and is not qualified to diagnose Dorner. I agree that Dorner's manifesto does hold a lot info but it-in-and-of-its-self is not enough to actually diagnose him. As per my comments above the manifesto also holds a lot of Dorner's thoughts that are contrary to a diagnosis of "pathological narcissist."

Dorner is--rightly so--very unpopular and a villain as such he is going to be vilified. It is going to be very popular for everyone and their brother to attribute all kinds of mental illnesses upon him based on little evidence.

Why? why, does it matter if Dorner has a mental "defect" or not? Is everyone who kills someone who did not directly provoke them mentally ill?

It makes us feel better if we can bucket people who do evil things as mentally ill. That makes us safe from becoming like them because we are not mentally ill like them...right? If we keep away from the mentally ill we will be safer as well, right?

In reality almost anyone can be pushed/manipulated or put in a situation where they end up doing horrible things. The Milgram Experiment and Stanford Prison Experiment showed us that this is clearly the case.

Admitting that a darker nature of humanity exists in "normal" people does not mean we have to embrace and condone it. We ignore the motivations and reasons that cause a "normal" persons daemons to take them over at our peril.

FYI, here are some things that actual psychologists have said about Dorner:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/14/christopher-dorner-sociopath-experts_n_2679125.html

"While this man's actions are unthinkable and inexcusable, he does not fit the profile of a sociopath, who lacks the capacity for empathy and has no respect for social morals and norms," said Elizabeth Waterman, a psychologist in Newport Beach, Calif. "Dorner showed that he did care for the welfare of others, and, as a police officer, worked to protect the rights of others on a daily basis.

* * * * *

Dorner's empathetic beliefs went beyond victims of police brutality and corruption. According to his manifesto, his empathy led him to fervently defend the rights of gays and lesbians and to stand up against anti-Semitism, psychologist Izzy Kalman pointed out in Psychology Today.
* * * * *
"We all become sociopathic when we feel victimized," Kalman said. "Our conscience gets flushed down the drain. We feel like we are the good guys, the innocent victims, and they are the bad guys, the bullies -- and bullies, as we have been taught, are not to be tolerated."

* * * * *

Kathy Platoni, a psychologist for the U.S. Army Reserve, said Dorner does not fit the description of a person with an antisocial personality disorder. Though there "may be a connection between diminished self-control and increased aggression in those diagnosed with PTSD, … it rarely leads to violence, especially of this magnitude," she said.

* * * * *

"The poor and downtrodden, who have suffered unending, unspeakable abuse, … their internal lives are saturated in rage and a sense of utter helplessness," said Erika Sloane, a psychologist in Los Angeles. "I do not see this as a reflection of individual failings or 'mental illness.' I see the rage as a response to our increasingly corrupt, unjust, unresponsive culture."

Interesting, but I think defending the rights of the downtrodden can be a form of narcissism because they will seem like a hero to those he is helping and the narcissist needs to be the hero. I had a person close to me who was labeled a narcissist by a psychologist for the doing the same.

But psychologists are known to be wildly inaccurate and dysfunctional themselves, so I wouldn't put too much stock in anything they said, including your examples.

An FBI profiler I would believe more. They usually come in the ballpark closely to what is the reality.

MsBennet says

But psychologists are known to be wildly inaccurate and dysfunctional themselves, so I wouldn't put too much stock in anything they said, including your examples.

Dysfunctional? yes.

Wildly inaccurate? no.

You do realize who it is who came up with the narcissism definition you are working from, right?

MsBennet says

I had a person close to me who was labeled a narcissist by a psychologist for the doing the same.

And you think that persons diagnosis was wildly inaccurate? But, when applied to Dorner it is accurate? I am confused...

The Dorner case reminds me of Crime and Punishment book by Dostoyevski - both Dorner and Raskolnikov ulimately met their demise because they could not overcome certain moral obstacles and hence fell short of "extraordinary man" status as a result of their weakness to do the things that most people would find rightfully ruthless.

Fatal mistake? Embarking on a mission of vengeance and publishing a manifesto about it. I expect some cops do get away with murder and retaliation. But they are ones who frame someone else and never claim "credit".

Vicente says

Embarking on a mission of vengeance and publishing a manifesto about it.

What's weird is that a manifesto seems to serve as dividing line in the popular mindset, separating the Dorners of the world from your usual run-of-the-mill homicidal maniac -- especially if there's a popular touchstone embedded within the narrative, like crooked cops.

http://thejoyofcardboard.wordpress.com/2013/02/14/i-want-my-threshold-back/