Once again, just as in the case of the Unabomber, a manifesto gives insight into the deadly triad of narcissism, paranoia, and "wound collecting." Read More
Respectfully, Joe, I question whether you read the entire "manifesto," which serves as a jihadist suicide note. I don't know if you are trying to promote a specific agenda, or if you just didn't read his entire screed.
He is very, very angry with the LAPD "blue line" and an organizational culture which he views as both morally and legally corrupt. The people within the LAPD who promote or tolerate this behavior, culture and bigotry are his targets for vengeance, along with their families. He does not appear to be anti LGBT, as you stated. He has a whole paragraph on equal rights under our laws for all citizens. He also stated he doesn't like lesbian officers who use their official authority to intentionally emasculate men. He stated a lot of things, but it is clear he doesn't like LAPD officers who commit physical abuse on citizens and then lie about it to Internal Affairs, Official Boards of Inquiry, and Courts of Law. He doesn't like that officers who engage in, incite, tolerate, or cover up such behavior are promoted within the LAPD..while a whistle blower has his character and two careers destroyed for leveling a complaint against an illegal act by an officer of the law.
So, while going Rambo and declaring "Vengeance is Mine" is not socially acceptable, Dorner's manifesto may not be as much toxic as it is desperate. Desperate to reveal and publicize institutionalized behavior within the LAPD that he believes is both criminal and morally outrageous.
Thank you Pkorman for your accurate and insightful comments. I have seen Chris Dorner's "manifesto." I read it in full and didn't find it toxic or crazy or vengeful or any of what the media has made it and him out to be. Many people agree that the L.A.P.D. IS corrupt and has been for many, many years.
The man-hunt to kill Dorner was to silence him, not capture him... and it had nothing to do with "protecting the innocent." Witness the cops shooting up innocent people in their own vehicles that had no relation to anything Dorner was driving.
It's just a terrible shame that the American public is constantly being fed a line of b.s. to keep them afraid, that serves to keep the ever-present corruption agenda boiling in earnest in America, where little if anything is being done to focus on facts or truth.
Thank God for honest media reporting, when we can find it, and for commentators like you, who bring home the real, relevant points in heated situations like these.
I don't know what Psychology Today's agenda is in printing a story like this, or the author for writing & promoting it, but they both need to take a litmus test of their own to see what mirror they are using. I'd say it's pretty warped and cracked right now.
I don't know what it will take to "fix things" in America, or if they are even "fixable" at all. Witness the gun control's lobby running congress right now. The chickens ARE coming home to roost and it's not a pretty sight. "We support our troops" was the battle cry of the middle and lower classes; I wonder what they have to say now that the troops are home and marching against them! Dorner is just the beginning, believe me. There's more to come.
I did read the manifesto, and as so many others before, it is self reporting and his perceptions. BUt that is not the issue. The issue is what it says about his narcissism and sense of entitlement. There is no agenda, he lays it all out for us: it is about his flawed personality - nothing new: pedantic wound collecting coupled with narcissism and paranoia.
The killer did communicate in a very pedantic way of communication, but he did not direct his comments against any minority as a whole, other than those that worked in the department.
He directed his comments specifically at the behavior of White Officers, Latino Officers, Black Officers, Lesbian Officers, and Asian Officers. The only group that got a pass from him was homosexual male officers, regardless of race. However, it was reported that he stated there was racism in the department and threatened an eventual lawsuit over it.
He voiced support for LGBT rights while holding them responsible to his rigid beliefs that people should do what he thinks is the right thing, protecting the first amendment rights of Chick Fil-A, and acknowledging the quality of their product, chicken.
He admitted to chronic depression listing football injuries as a potential factor in the depression.
From the manifesto:
"It's time to allow gay service member's spouses to utilize the same benefits that all heterosexual dependents are eligible for. Medical, Dental, Tricare, Deers, SGLI, BX, Commissary, Milstar, MWR, etc. Flag officers, lets be honest. You can't really give a valid argument to as why gays shouldn't be eligible as every month a new state enacts laws that allow same sex marriage.
LGBT community and supporters, the same way you have the right to voice your opinion on acceptance of gay marriage, Chick Fil-A has a right to voice their beliefs as well. That's what makes America so great. Freedom of expression. Don't be assholes and boycott/degrade their business and customers who patronize the locations. They make some damn good chicken! Vandalizing (graffiti) their locations does not help any cause."
This guy is not the run of the mill narcissist paranoid individual or spree killer. There is no run of the mill narcissistic paranoid spree killer. They all have their own special ingredients that lead to these crimes, often starting in early childhood.
He is a mixture of Timothy McVeigh, Theodore Kacyznsi, Nadal Malik Hasan, and has been presented in the media as somewhere between Kirk Douglas in "Falling Down" and "Rambo" gone over to the dark side. It is also apparent that he has been living a good portion of his reality inside the TV and Internet. The way he described famous people on TV like they were his close friends, provides some suggestion of potential psychosis, possibly generated by years of his reported chronic depression.
Reporting a fellow police officer for kicking a mentally ill person in the face, if true, is not really reflective of the type of self centered lying behavior associated with narcissism.
It also could be possible that he has issues with anabolic steroids, as the morphic features of his face in his active duty naval officer photos do not reflect his college football photo or pictures taken of him when he was an officer in the naval reserves.
There are many "ingredients" to this case that seem unique from almost any other historical spree killing reported. And by the same token, ingredients listed in almost every historical spree killing, per loss of occupation and social role in society, mental illness, weapons, and a motive for revenge at a large segment of society. In this case the 10K members of the LAPD.
He has established his name again, but will be remembered in a bad light somewhere in a Wiki Article for the foreseeable future. But ironically enough, and sadly predictable as a hero to some people that hate the authority that the police and the government have over overs, with some people wishing him success. This incident tells a disturbing tale about society, but not just about a killer.
Eric Berne and the Transactional Analysis crew developed the whole concept of "stamp collecting" back in the 60's and 70's. This was when grocery stores used to give out (non-postage) stamps with each purchase. There were gold stamps, S&H green stamps, etc. You'd paste them into books on rainy days and a catalog would tell you what you could get for cashing in X number of books.
People do the same things in personal relationships, collecting and then cashing in their books of stamps for a free whatever -- an outburst, a sulk, an unauthorized drinking binge, etc. -- it would always appear to the other person as an over-reaction to whatever it was which completed the filling out of the book(s).
There may have been some element of this present. The TA crowd didn't extend the concept to institutional relationships so far as I know. No matter, if he was innocent but railroaded before, he's guilty now. If you're going to do the time you may as well at least enjoy doing the crime.
Thomas Jefferson had a fundamentally optimistic view of human nature; history had taught him and the other FF's that it was men in groups who went bad. This is the basis for a system emphasizing individual liberty and a highly restrained government.
So I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt in what he's saying, based also on what the people who know him are saying. But I don't think the bottom will ever be gotten to, based on how these post-disaster proceedings tend to go.
You make good points
Your article would fit any man/woman with high moral standards whose rights have been violated by an organization in the field of justice. Of course, you yourself would be all zen about it.
Your reaction is typical for a society which criminalizes victims in order to deny responsibility for its crimes. Actually, it is pathological sadists hiding behind their pseudo-science we should be afraid of.
I am NOT one to, in any way, defend criminal behavior or the taking of innocent lives. But I read Dormer's manifesto and I find him to make some rather valid points about a few things. He's very intelligent. He's not officially psychotic.
His basic gripe is that he feels he was wrongly fired.
Sometimes people feel they need vindication or simply to be fully heard, especially if they feel they were wronged. He apparently felt this way for years: he couldn't get 'heard' by anyone who could make a difference in the matter and he unfortunately took this turn. As someone else above said...I hear desperation and unheard pain.
Does that justify taking the lives of innocents'? Again I say Absolutely NOT.
He didn't bash homosexuals; he said that Chik-Fil-A etc is entitled to their position just as homosexuals are entitled to theirs.
He gave great kudos to many he felt were upright people, some of them he knew, others he only knew of. In his pictures BEFORE his firing, he was obviously happy with his work, his career, but then...something happened: He lost his job, his career, his name.
A new Ebook deals with this--how people don't first see one's pain, but then when that person gets angry, all hell breaks loose. See 'First Do No Harm' link on my page here.
Again, I read the words of a man who felt wronged by an establishment that has been known to sometimes do wrong things before. But I SO hate that he took to murdering people in order to make his point and to get heard.
Thank you for your comments.
You explained it very well. Thank you
Keep deleting this comment. I'll be happy to repost.
Your observation of Christopher Dorner's character is very accurate.
Since many have obviously read the manifesto on this posting (though with varying opinions), I have a question to pose, why do news agencies always state that these manifestos are "rambling?" CNN, Fox News, New York Times to name a few.
I do not feel that the letter was veering this way and that. The basic structure of the letter was 1.) His problem 2.) What he intended to solve the problem and 3.) How he was going to accomplish this. Though not poetic, the letter did purposefully convey his thoughts and feelings on the matter.
I call it "rambling" because he's all over the place. Personal injury, revenge, politics, gun control, and unsolicited advice to celebrities he has apparently never met. That's pretty rambling.
Is Kate Winslet really supposed to care what this guy thinks?
I find the posts on this article interesting. So far everyone who has commented on the article seems to assume that this alleged murderer is telling the truth in his manifesto. Does anyone think that just maybe he’s not telling the truth?
This guy is a “victim” alright, a victim of his own mind.
Not sure why others call it rambling, but for some it was pedantically rambling (covered state department, lesbians, mexicans, blacks, conspiracies, bullying, obscure words that only military understands, civil rights abuses, discrimination - this was addressed to America but commanded the media to investigate) some would argue that is rambling.
You have a valid point and actually most people see through the invective and wound collecting. This is his perceptions, his self reporting, and his writing. Where the truth lies, that is a whole other issue.
Lots of people don't get heard, get treated badly, etc. I just got wrongfully fired recently, because I complained of favoritism. I did not get a fair hearing. I also did not write a rambling manifesto, nurture a load of self-righteous indignation, decide that the entire planet is going to pay attention to me me me no matter what, and murder people who had nothing to do with it. If he was "in pain and desperate", that's his to deal with, or to get help with.
He's also living proof that people with this mindset can get into armed forces and law enforcement, where they can get training and do the most damage.
I've been keeping track of this developing news story, and a local radio station here in the Los Angeles area has been interviewing people who know or used to know Dorner. A woman was interviewed who claimed to know Dorner and used to date him; she said that he showed distinctly paranoid behaviors and thought patterns; he perceived negative, hostile motivations and subtexts in other's words and actions, where none existed.
I suppose that "grudge collecting" or "Injustice collecting" is another term for "paranoia"?
This and your article is bolstering my own personal theory that it takes that "perfect storm" combination of having a severe personality disorder (particularly narcissistic pd or psychopathy) PLUS a psychotic disorder (particularly paranoid schizophrenia) to result in the horror and tragedy of mass murder.
In addition to the individual having both narcissistic pd (or psychopathy) PLUS paranoid schizophrenia, I believe it also takes:
* a precipitating event:
In this case, Dorner was "fired" from the naval reserves a few days before he started killing people. He blamed his earlier dismissal from the LAPD for this, somehow. The shootings began only a day or so after his dismissal from the naval reserves.
*treatment is malfunctioning:
the individual is either:
undiagnosed and untreated, or
misdiagnosed and receiving the wrong treatment, or
diagnosed and receiving treatment, but living in an *unsupervised environment* (has no supervision RE making sure he takes his prescribed anti-psychotic/anti-anxiety/anti-violence meds, the individual is free to come and go as he pleases, has access to money, access to private transportation, access to weapons, alcohol and other drugs, etc.)
I think its time for some kind of violence-prediction assessment tool to be available so that individuals who are just barely functional and are teetering on the edge of a violent murder spree can receive intervention at an earlier stage of their deterioration.
We the public need SOME KIND of tool to help raise our awareness of the kind of behaviors and circumstances that IN COMBINATION generate that "perfect storm" that results in tragic mass violence.
The first is that all humans have the ability to become violent, so predicting violence is going to be really dicey.
The second is that we have civil rights, and you can't subject people to forced treatment, etc until *after* they do something. If the first *something* they do is multiple murders, people want to know why it wasn't prevented. Well, because we have civil rights, and because law enforcement is generally limited to acting within the law, and criminals are not.
Imagine someone over-reacting because they think someone is on the edge, and the lawsuits that would result. Even if they were correct and that someone WAS on the edge, because they haven't yet done anything, they have plausible deniability.
Of course everyone gets angry from time to time, some people become physically violent (slapping, hitting, punching) when they're angry or enraged, but I do not agree that all human beings are capable of committing mass murder.
I'm suggesting that at the point when these very disturbed individuals who have both a serious personality disorder and a psychotic disorder *post their plans on the Internet* or *send their plans to their psychiatrist*, announcing their intentions almost exactly like comic-book super-villains do, then THAT would be the big waving red flag that this individual has reached the tipping point and is intending to do violence.
So, yes: when they TELL US that they are preparing to kill a bunch of people because they feel entitled to, and here's how they're going to do it, THAT would be the time to do a proactive intervention, i.e., Baker-act their ass.
From the reading I've done about Holmes, the Colorado theater shooter, he clearly announced his intentions ahead of time: detailed notebooks of his plans and drawings showing how he was going to take out a lot of people were sent to his college psychologist, who actually warned her superiors that Holmes was dangerous and close to becoming violent, and still nothing proactive was done.
The Columbine duo showed clear signs of planning their massacre; they wrote detailed plans and made videos ahead of time about their intentions.
If the FBI is able to crack into Adam Lanza's wrecked computer hard-drive, I'd be willing to bet that he gave plenty of indications ahead of time, posting about his feelings of entitlement to engage in a sickening murder spree of little children.
The problem is (a) getting the right people to SEE these warning signs and (b) DO something about these bat-shit crazy individuals.
There needs to be a better balance, a better compromise between a mental patient's individual civil rights, and the right of the general population to expect safety in public places like their school, their local mall, their local theater, etc.
If individual civil liberties are the sacred cow, and going to be given the highest priority, then perhaps we need a new law commanding every citizen to carry a loaded firearm at all times, because that's the only way that insane shooters *can* be stopped: by two dozen trained, armed bystanders right there in the immediate area. It will be like the Wild West again, in spades.
Is that what we all want? I don't. I'd rather see more priority given to more mental health treatment and more trained medical supervision (in-patient residential care) for those who have truly severe personality disorders coupled with psychotic disorders.
I agree lets get them some help
My admittedly limited understanding is that law enforcement and mental health professions CAN act on a credible threat if they have one. Often, these "obvious warning signs" are revealed as the murders are unfolding, or in the investigation that follows murder. They can only act pre-emptively if they have the threat before the act.
It's possible that confidentiality clauses prevent the release of some of these threats ahead of time. Does the therapist think the threat is credible, or that it's a fantasy? If the therapist doesn't know, would the general public know? I've read concerns that forcing such threats to be revealed in violation of confidentiality could stigmatize therapy and make the people most in need shy away, but whether that overrides public safety is a discussion that needs to happen.
Sadly, common sense isn't as common as we'd like to think.
I think you make very good points
You make very good points about civil liberties
"Actually, it is pathological sadists hiding behind their pseudo-science we should be afraid of." Hear hear! It's a well known fact that the Unabomber, who all government "experts" love to hold up as the epitome of evil, was subjected to years of extensive psychological torture by another government expert while a teenage university student. Dorner walked around for years waving red flags and apparently nobody even tried to help him, even tho he was employed by the PD and the military. Nice job demonizing him after the fact, tho - apparently that's all you guys are good at.
yeah, said but true.
More information about formatting options
Joe Navarro is a former FBI Counterintelligence Agent and is the author of What Every Body is Saying. He is an expert on nonverbal communications and body language.
When and how should we open up to loved ones?