(10-05-2017, 07:23 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote:

(10-05-2017, 07:12 PM)JackCity Wrote: The motive definitely is relevant..all the little pieces of info we have are too in their own way.  

Even if could never fully understand his mind I think it's important to find out why and how it happened. People don't just do things like this on whim.

They don't do it on a whim, these examples I gave took preparation and were premeditated. That doesn't mean there is no reason for it other than they're just bat [BLEEP] crazy. They can say they have a 'reason' but all the people I mentioned were just messed up people. I mean, what is a good reason/excuse to eat your victim (Jeffrey Dahmer?) None, other than he was exceptionally messed up in the head. No childhood trauma, or any other trauma is going to explain that away. 

Ted Bundy had no trauma in his background. No childhood whatever to motivate him to kill all those women. He just did it. 

Some people are just evil. There is nothing to explain it.

Right but that's why I think the motive is relevant. Dahlmer for instance started going off the rails as a young teenager. Both Dahlmer and Bundy displayed key evidence that would indicate they were socio/psychopaths. They didn't have a key component that most humans have and that eventually led down the trail of commiting those horrible and evil acts.  
Theres no understanding the frame of mind they were in buts it's important to know the why.   

Likewise with this guy. 99.9 of humans don't ever decide to shoot 600 people. Why did this guy? What went wrong with him? When did the idea implant?  All of this is relevant after a crime such as this. I think it would be odd to just declare him crazy and say there was no reason for it other than him being mad and leave it at that.

---