Shooting at Univ. Alabama Huntsville (merged thread folds in Parents Cafe comments)

<p>This talk of psychopath or sociopath reminds me of the often used statement that “there is a fine line between brilliance and insanity”. This lady clearly crossed that line.</p>

<p>The idea of “tests” and such came up last night on the news, and someone said that educators would refuse various tests because they might be used to disclose political or religious leanings and other things that are irrelevant to their abilities as educators. Even if a test wouldn’t reveal those things, they would fear that allowing such tests would “open the door” to other tests.</p>

<p>Mom2-- First, I hope your friend is doing well, today, and that the prognosis is progressively positive!</p>

<p>You really bring up an interesting point. We are always in this process of balancing individual freedom against the greater safety. Most of us, even with the risks involved, opt on the side of the right to keep our minds to ourselves. I think it’s a big fear, the big brother encroachment.</p>

<p>In my opinion, there is no way to completely avoid workplace blow-ups, of the passionate, hopeless variety. The scandal with this one goes back to braintree (just the NAME of the town make it so Poesque), and the original refusal to investigate her brother’s murder. fwiw.</p>

<p>I agree the actions of the Braintree police chief and DA in 1986/1987 are highly suggestive of a cover up, but the real culprits in failing to do their duty to protect society are her parents and husband. We know of 2 definitive incidents of Amy’s psychopathic behavior there are probably more, just not with fatal outcomes. Her family shares some of the blame for the shootings at UAH.</p>

<p>“Is it a matter of the MMPI score being over-inclusive, or do the “real” ones escape detection perhaps for the reasons poetgrl mentioned?”</p>

<p>I think that poetgirl’s hypothesis probably is correct. The MMPI was normed by comparing inpatient mental health patients with people considered to be normal. Those “normal” people were, I think, visitors to mental health patients (who now it’s realized may not have been normal themselves since many mental health problems are hereditary, and many visitors to patients in mental health facilities are patients’ blood relatives).</p>

<p>I think it’s highly unlikely that an exceptionally smart psychopath would have landed in a mental health hospital. Consequently, I doubt that there are norms for and ways to assess the kind of psychopathology Amy Bishop may have.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Other than the brother, what other incident was known before this tragedy? According to the husband, the pipe bomb incident wasn’t her.</p>

<p>Well, I don’t know if I agree about the Husband. But, the mother was definitely there during the brother’s killing, and she definitely withheld information, at the very least, if not outright just using her influence to “save” her daughter from an investigation into what really happened that night. She is really responsible for, at least, that.</p>

<p>the husband may have been entirely fooled, though. People like this spend thier lives fooling people. It would depend on if he had any real understanding of where she was really at, and he doesn’t really sound that sharp. "the kids are doing okay, they’re new englanders??? Not that emotionally savvy.</p>

<p>“Well, I don’t know if I agree about the Husband. But, the mother was definitely there during the brother’s killing, and she definitely withheld information, at the very least, if not outright just using her influence to “save” her daughter from an investigation into what really happened that night. She is really responsible for, at least, that.”</p>

<p>We don’t know what the mother saw or heard. If her daughter is indeed a psychopath, the daughter may have convinced the mother that the situation was different than what the mother may have witnessed and heard. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable even when people are trying hard to be truthful.</p>

<p>If one of my sons killed his brother, I would be too in shock and grief stricken probably to realize what had actually happened. I wouldn’t be surprised if that also was true for the mother – if indeed she was present when the shooting occurred.</p>

<p>Consequently, the people I blame are the police because even for shootings that very obviously are accidental, there are lengthy investigations and the records are maintained.</p>

<p>I agree that the husband seems pretty clueless, from the reports. It may not be a coincidence that she would marry a person with little “emotional savvy.” Who else would stay with her?</p>

<p>poetgrl, I agree with you about the husband being fooled. I would not put too much stock into the sound bites that he feeds the press though. I that this man is in utter shock and the press is looking for comments from him. I think he also said something about after the sun goes down that his family is having a hard time. Whatever he says are probably a snapshot of many free flowing thoughts of the moment coming out of his mouth while the press tries to get him to talk. I don’t know what his comments really mean, if anything.</p>

<p>Both good points NSM.</p>

<p>I still haven’t heard an answer to my question of whether I’m right to think that whoever wrote the DA’s report should have known enough about shotguns to realize that Amy Bishop’s story of several successive “accidental” discharges on different floors of the house – followed by a convenient loss of memory concerning what happened after she ran outside – made no sense, and shouldn’t have simply been accepted without question (as appears from the report to have happened). If they should have realized it, then it does start to sound more like a deliberate cover up than simple incompetence.</p>

<p>Regardless of whether it was a malicious cover up or not, it was still a cover-up. Even if the police chief at the time did not believe that the young Amy Bishop intentionally murdered her brother, a full investigation should have been undertaken. I mean, the girl was running around the town with a shotgun, at the very least.</p>

<p>I am still puzzled by the journal article published with the kids as co-authors.</p>

<p>It may be far too late to prosecute Amy Bishop, her mother, or anybody else for anything that happened in 1986, short of a murder charge. Criminal laws have statutes of limitations, just like civil laws:</p>

<p>[Massachusetts</a> - Criminal Statutes of Limitations - Criminal Law](<a href=“http://criminallaw.uslegal.com/criminal-statutes-of-limitations/massachusetts/]Massachusetts”>Massachusetts – Criminal Law)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>From what I’ve read, she moved to Alabama from Massachusetts after any possibly applicable statute of limitations (other than for murder, of course) had already expired, so the tolling provision would not apply to her. It clearly wouldn’t apply to her mother, who has always lived in Massachusetts, so I think her mother is off the hook (unless they could prosecute her as an accessory after the fact to murder, if they believed that she perpetrated a deliberate cover up).</p>

<p>Donna…</p>

<p>Your questions are legit…they absolutely point to a deliberate cover-up. Certainly those in law enforcement know that it’s not easy to accidentally shoot someone with a shotgun, and that it’s impossible to accidentally fire one 3 times!!!</p>

<p>I really don’t think there is a question of whether there was a cover-up. I think the city knows that there was. The problem is proving it. Logically, the facts point to a cover-up. But, it’s hard to prove that 20+ years later.</p>

<p>bluealien… I am still puzzled by the journal article published with the kids as co-authors.</p>

<p>LOL…I think Amy was setting her children up to have some “Ivy hooks”.</p>

<p>BTW…her eldest child is 18…I wonder where she applied to college?</p>

<p>I don’t think the husband was fooled at all. I think he knew about her and maybe was an enabler at the least. I know that sounds harsh but there is something seriously creepy about him. He was there for the other two incidents and may have protected her as well.</p>

<p>About the kids - I don’t think so. I think if this “business” made money they wanted to funnel at least some of it through the kids. I also think her continued employment was required for the business to make money and it all fell apart when she didn’t get tenure.</p>

<p>mom2,</p>

<p>I wonder if the oldest kid is a CC poster…</p>