Nashville school shooter’s writings reignite debate over releasing material written by mass killers
In Tennessee, a request for police to release a school shooter’s private writings has morphed into a complex multiparty fight that pits the parents of traumatized students against a coalition of local news outlets, nonprofits, and a Republican lawmaker — with both sides claiming their position is in the public interest. The person who killed three 9-year-old children and three adults at a private Christian elementary school in Nashville on March 27 left behind at least 20 journals, a suicide note, and a memoir, according to court filings. But there is no national standard governing if, or how, such writings are made public. Shooters sometimes release their writings themselves over the internet, prompting a race to suppress their spread. In 2019, the white supremacist who killed 51 worshippers at mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, posted his anti-immigrant screed online. Five months later, a man who killed 23 at a Texas Walmart published a racist diatribe on the same message board. In other cases, killers have sent documents directly to news outlets, leaving them the decision of what to publish. NBC was criticized by victims’ families in 2007 for airing videos the Virginia Tech shooter mailed to the network in the midst of his killing spree. Where a killer’s writings are seized as part of a search warrant — as is the case in The Covenant School shooting — the decision of what to release and when often rests with a local police chief or sheriff and is ultimately governed by state-specific public records laws. After a supervisor at a Virginia Walmart fatally shot six co-workers last November, police took only a few days to release his rambling last note. Michigan State University campus police waited less than a month to release a grievance-filled note from the person who killed three students there in February. Nashville police said they will release the Covenant shooter’s writings but not until they close the investigation, which could take a year. In the face of this delay, multiple groups have sued for access, including a state senator, The Tennessean newspaper, and a gun-rights organization. On the other side, The Covenant School, the church that shares its building, and many of the school’s parents want to keep the records private. Such a fight is unusual but not unprecedented. A similar legal battle in the 2000s led to the eventual release of most of the Columbine killers’ writings, audiotapes, and videotapes. In that case, Columbine parents fought for access to the records, believing they would show a cover-up by the local sheriff. In the Covenant shooting, it’s the parents who want the shooter’s writings kept secret. Erin Kinney, mother of one of the slain children, filed a declaration with the court stating she has not seen the shooter’s writings but believes there are no answers to be found in them. “I do not believe there was any motivation other than a desire for death, and there is nothing that could ever make the horrible act of killing children make sense,” Kinney writes. “The public release of these writings will not prevent the next attack. There is nothing in the journals to satisfy the yearning, overactive minds of the conspiracy theorists.” The Covenant case is complicated by the fact that the shooter, who police say was “assigned female at birth,” seems to have identified as a transgender man. U.S. Sen Josh Hawley, of Missouri, is among those promoting a theory that the shooting was a hate crime against Christians. The refusal to release the writings has fueled speculation — particularly in conservative circles — regarding what they might contain and conspiracy theories about why the police won’t release them. In the legal battle over the writings, both sides argue their position will prevent future shootings. The coalition seeking the writings says their public release will help experts better understand mass shootings and develop policies to thwart them. A group of more than 60 Tennessee House Republicans said in an open letter that the Covenant writings will be critical for their debate of school safety legislation at an August special session called by the governor. But the parents say releasing the writings is dangerous and will inspire copycats. There is a growing movement to deny mass killers notoriety after their deaths, limiting the use of their names and images, so posthumous fame won’t be a motivating factor for future killings. Whether their writings should also be suppressed is a subject of some disagreement, even among mass shooting experts. “Perpetrators are looking to make headlines,” said Jillian Peterson, a criminology professor at Hamline University and president of The Violence Project. “Perpetrators are looking to be famous for that. And so when we spread their videos, and their words, and their pictures, and their writings — we’ve seen that before, that it does inspire copycats.” Adam Lankford, a professor of criminology at the University of Alabama who studies mass shootings, said he thinks there is a way to make a killer’s writings public without inspiring copycats. The biggest problem is killers are sometimes made into celebrities, with their names and photos splashed across news reports for weeks, he said. “I don’t think a manifesto in isolation is likely to inspire an attack if you can’t see who that person is and start to identify with them,” he said. “But if you’re already obsessed with that individual, then, you know, that obsession can extend to obsessing about that person’s words.” Beyond the debate over the public good, however, lies the issue of Tennessee’s open records law, which has no special exception for the writings of mass shooters. Richard Hollow, who represents The Tennessean and state Sen. Todd Gardenhire, said the parents should try to change the law if they don’t want the records released. That’s what happened after the Sandy Hook shooting, where parents successfully pushed Connecticut lawmakers to bar the release of certain homicide victim photos and delay the release of some audio recordings. In the Covenant case, the families are making the novel claim that they have rights as victims under the Tennessee Constitution
Alabama newspapers editorial roundup
Tuesday: The Anniston Star on being caught up in the crossfire of health care law opposition: Todd Gardenhire and Luis Lang aren’t household names, but their recent experiences with health care speak loud and clear about Obamacare and how it’s perceived by some Americans. Gardenhire is a Tennessee state senator from Chattanooga. This year, he joined his Republican colleagues on the Senate Health and Welfare Committee to kill a proposal to expand Medicaid coverage to 280,000 working Tennessee residents who can’t afford health insurance. When a proponent of the expansion pointed out that “virtually every member of the Tennessee General Assembly receives some form of tax-subsidized health care,” Gardenhire took exception. “I have very nice health care provided to me through my private employer,” he said. “My wife’s on Social Security.” Only later did the senator come to realize that, yes, the state of Tennessee is picking up a big chunk of the costs of his health insurance. According to a new report in The Tennessean, the state has paid almost $31,000 of Gardenhire’s insurance bill since 2008. The senator now says he asked to be dropped from the state coverage. There’s no form, however, to forgo the shame of being an uninformed blowhard. Lang’s story is much more heartbreaking. The Fort Mill, South Carolina, resident is in very real danger of losing his eyesight. Diabetes is the central reason for the bleeding in his eyes and a partially detached retina, according to an article in The Charlotte Observer. The problem is that Lang, 49, doesn’t have health insurance to cover the costs of surgery and the medical bills for treatment has drained his savings. Paying out-of-pocket was fine for Lang and his wife until February when he had a series of small strokes and his vision weakened. “He’s in a very bad situation,” Malcolm Edwards, Lang’s ophthalmologist, said. “The longer he waits, the poorer his results will be.” Several factors are working against Lang: Lang, a Republican, had previously defied the Obamacare mandate to purchase health insurance. By the time he applied for Obamacare, he had missed the enrollment date for this year. Unable to work and earn money as a self-employed handyman, his income is too low to qualify for subsidies to purchase private insurance. South Carolina is one of many states that has thus far refused to expand Medicaid to cover those who are trapped like Lang. (And, yes, Alabama is one of them, as well.) Who’s to blame for this crisis? Is it Lang, who by his own admission is a smoker and hasn’t been diligent in treating his diabetes? Is it South Carolina’s Republican-dominated elected leadership that refuses to expand Medicaid? It’s President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats, say the Langs. “We call it the Not Fair Health Care Act,” said Mary Lang, Luis’ wife. In a larger sense, the culprit is one of political leadership at the top of the Republican Party. It’s House Republicans who voted dozens of times to repeal it. It’s a relentless judicial assault on the law by conservative activists. It’s a slate of 2016 GOP presidential wannabes promising to tear the law apart. It’s members of Congress who won’t make peace with Obamacare and yet won’t offer a viable alternative. By this measure, Gardenhire and Lang are caught in the crossfire of an ideological war that shows no sign of ceasing. Online: http://www.annistonstar.com • • • Tuesday Dothan Eagle on special needs children: There’s been a lot of gloom and doom coming out of Montgomery, where Alabama lawmakers are charged with the task of balancing the state’s General Fund and looking for ways to close a gaping divide between revenue and expenses. We’ve all heard about the possibility of shutting down half of the state parks, decimating the state trooper force and other draconian measures. One has to wonder if the threats are empty, perhaps simply saber-rattling to make tax hikes and/or gambling expansion seem like the lesser evil. Regardless, turning special needs children into pawns in a political game is unconscionable, but that’s exactly what has happened. On Monday, people gathered at Vivian B. Adams School in Ozark to protest a potential $35 million reduction in mental health funding. The number is misleading, because the loss of that $35 million would mean the state couldn’t receive another $64 million in matching funds from the federal government. Mental health care programs in Alabama would lose a whopping $99 million. Lawmakers should have to see firsthand how their decisions will affect Alabama families. They had an opportunity in Ozark on Monday, but only one of 140 Alabama lawmakers showed up: Rep. Steve Clouse, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, who lives in Ozark. We applaud Rep. Clouse for attending the rally and speaking with concerned residents, and appreciate his willingness to deliver their message to his colleagues in Montgomery. We wish he could take the clients of Vivian B. Adams School with him. If Alabama lawmakers had to look into the faces of clients like Diane Kautz‘s daughter, for whom the school is the “happiest place on earth,” they’d surely find a way to keep funding intact. Online: http://www.dothaneagle.com • • • Wednesday Decatur Daily on handguns: There are few public servants we respect more than law enforcement officers. As honest Americans and Alabamians, we have reason to take note of our appreciation to the men and women who patrol our cities, counties and state. Most of us can point to at least one specific instance when an officer responded in a time of need. It’s too bad we don’t think of such moments when we elect politicians who create laws that make their jobs harder and more dangerous. The so-called Second Amendment laws passed by our politicians, who pander to our most base and sometimes irrational fears, are a shining example. It was never hard to buy a gun in Alabama. And no one ever threatened to take them away. Yet some of our least sincere, or
