Stabbing in Brentwood-5 Dead, 1 Arrested

[morgin]

Originally Posted by zamler

I count at least two major assumptions on your part.

Yes he is, without a shadow of a doubt.

If you are certain he had a choice and chose to do this in a state of mind that is deemed legally competent, then I understand entirely where you are coming from.

The thing is, the professionals who are trained in this don't know anything for sure yet, so it's a pretty big assumption on your part to claim with any certainty any sort of black and white truth on him being some cold blooded killer in the same vein as a Pickton or Bernardo or the like (spree vs serial, but you get the point). It's possible, but it's also possible there's a lot more to this.

[1stLand]

It's a slippery slope arguing that a schizophrenic episode (for a man with no known public record of schizophrenia) caused the killings. How does one prove one occurred or didn't occur?

It sets a dangerous precedent for people want to commit a murder and are looking for a loophole to escape severe punishment.

Some of you on this Board seem to think a drunk driver is more repugnant for killing 5 people with his vehicle than Matt de Grood is of stabbing 5 people at a party.

I can't believe some of you on this board.

It reaffirms my belief that there is no hope for humanity or society

[zamler]

Originally Posted by morgin

If you are certain he had a choice and chose to do this in a state of mind that is deemed legally competent, then I understand entirely where you are coming from.

I'm not certain of anything except that he targeted and murdered 5 people in cold blood. It is possible although in my opinion very unlikely that de Grood suffered from acute mental illness to the point where he just snapped and decided to walk into a party and butcher five people in a random and uncontrollable act. Someone that resorts to that level of extreme violence often exhibits violent behaviour as an ongoing issue. And as far as I am aware, Matthew de Grood was known as basically a nice person.

So based on that, I am more inclined to believe that something triggered an extraordinary rage and he acted on it, not because he was severely mentally ill as a life long issue and was not in control of his own actions.

Now I'm going to assume that some of you are quite certain that de Grood's counsel will be putting forth the defence of mental disorder.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by 1stLand

It's a slippery slope arguing that a schizophrenic episode (for a man with no known public record of schizophrenia) caused the killings. How does one prove one occurred or didn't occur?

It sets a dangerous precedent for people want to commit a murder and are looking for a loophole to escape severe punishment.

Some of you on this Board seem to think a drunk driver is more guilty of killing 5 people with his vehicle than Matt de Grood is of stabbing 5 people at a party.

I can't believe some of you on this board.

It reaffirms my belief that there is no hope for humanity or society

this is hyper reactive, the people trying to rationalize his behavior are exhibiting empathy and trying to find positives in the situation. We are all aware he is guilty, it was so horrifyingly traumatic that his guilt is an afterthought, the question now is how the community moves on from such an event. Saying that you've lost hope for humanity because people want to soften the blow of such a horrible trauma is unnecessary.

Guilt isn't what's in question, there's so much confusion and so little information people are just trying to make it seem less sinister and more humane. If you don't agree with that that's fine, no need to condemn someone's existence like that though. There's plenty of things to give hope for humanity, society not as much.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by 1stLand

It's a slippery slope arguing that a schizophrenic episode (for a man with no known public record of schizophrenia) caused the killings. How does one prove one occurred or didn't occur?

It sets a dangerous precedent for people want to commit a murder and are looking for a loophole to escape severe punishment.

Some of you on this Board seem to think a drunk driver is more repugnant for killing 5 people with his vehicle than Matt de Grood is of stabbing 5 people at a party.

I can't believe some of you on this board.

It reaffirms my belief that there is no hope for humanity or society

you are right it is a slippery slope, alcoholism is a disease so are drunk drivers really responsible? Some seem to be bending over backwards to defend this guy and riding on their high horses...everyone is so PC these days yet society is going down the ####ter

Matt needs help and I hope he gets it, behind bars...he never deserves to live in a free society

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by 1stLand

Some of you on this Board seem to think a drunk driver is more repugnant for killing 5 people with his vehicle than Matt de Grood is of stabbing 5 people at a party.

I can't believe some of you on this board.

It reaffirms my belief that there is no hope for humanity or society

It's not super obvious to me how one scenario is significantly worse than the other. The victims of murder and drunk driving are both equally innocent, equally dead, and depending on the nature of the murder or the car crash, there is certainly opportunity for significant pain and suffering before death (or alternatively it might also be quick). And in both cases a choice was made by someone to cause the death.

[Banner]

Originally Posted by zamler

Yes he is, without a shadow of a doubt.

I like how you ignored everything else in my post except the bolded part. Like I said, you don't know this guy on a personal level. You only know the crime he committed. Your insight on why he would do what he did is mostly speculation on your part. Those who actually knew of his character and saw him every day react differently to his actions than you do. I'm not defending Matt, neither are his friends. Murder is inexcusable but he shouldn't be treated like a mass murderer who takes pleasure in killing people. Something that we don't know about caused him to do this, and based on his character and what people who knew him say, could probably be mental illness.

[stazzy33]

I for one am glad that this thread has become an example of what can be accomplished when people sit down and have a healthy debate, with rational well thought out points and counterpoints. Free from personal attacks and logical fallacies.

.... oh wait...

[Nage Waza]

Rage vs mentally I'll, in the end is there really a difference? The results are the same. Terrible story over all, each family has their own long path to get through this.

[zamler]

nm

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Banner

I like how you ignored everything else in my post except the bolded part. Like I said, you don't know this guy on a personal level. You only know the crime he committed. Your insight on why he would do what he did is mostly speculation on your part. Those who actually knew of his character and saw him every day react differently to his actions than you do. I'm not defending Matt, neither are his friends. Murder is inexcusable but he shouldn't be treated like a mass murderer who takes pleasure in killing people. Something that we don't know about caused him to do this, and based on his character and what people who knew him say, could probably be mental illness.

people who "knew" him are also biased...there is a reason nobody on the jury can know the suspect.

I also question how well some "knew" him...people come out of the woodwork in these situations (went to HS with him, couple classes, had beers one time, mutual friends ect.) It would take someone who knew him WELL and spent time with him recently to really know what was going on. Any psychologist will tell you nobody just "snaps" there are always signs.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

Rage vs mentally I'll, in the end is there really a difference?

Not for the victims and the families. But for Matt, his mental state both when he committed the murders and any ongoing mental health issues will have a big impact on where and how he lives out the rest of his life.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by zamler

Not for the victims and the families. But for Matt, his mental state both when he committed the murders and any ongoing mental health issues will have a big impact on where and how he lives out the rest of his life.

you know his lawyer is going to bust his ass to build a case of mental illness regardless of the facts. Thats the way the legal system works he has no other choice its not a question of guilt

[RougeUnderoos]

It might be time for some people to step back here and evaluate their own expertise in mental health issues, the justice system, and the direction of humanity in general.

[Banner]

Originally Posted by dino7c

people who "knew" him are also biased...there is a reason nobody on the jury can know the suspect.

I also question how well some "knew" him...people come out of the woodwork in these situations (went to HS with him, couple classes, had beers one time, mutual friends ect.) It would take someone who knew him WELL and spent time with him recently to really know what was going on. Any psychologist will tell you nobody just "snaps" there are always signs.

That's the thing. The opinions can be biased both sides for sure, for those who know him and who don't. And in my first post I mentioned that some of these people have been a classmate from pre-school to graduation, so I think that could be justified as knowing him well.

My point is those who actually met and knew the guy have a better understanding than some strangers who read about him on the paper and are voicing their opinions on the internet. It's easy to say he's a cold blooded murderer who decided to kill 5 people when you don't know him, because that's the only thing most people here know about him.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Banner

That's the thing. The opinions can be biased both sides for sure, for those who know him and who don't. And in my first post I mentioned that some of these people have been a classmate from pre-school to graduation, so I think that could be justified as knowing him well.

My point is those who actually met and knew the guy have a better understanding than some strangers who read about him on the paper and are voicing their opinions on the internet. It's easy to say he's a cold blooded murderer who decided to kill 5 people when you don't know him, because that's the only thing most people here know about him.

pre-school to high school graduation? that was a long time ago, people change quickly...I would be interested in recent interactions with him, close friends/family

any psychologist will tell you nobody just "snaps" there are always signs just sometimes more subtle.

[Matt Reeeeead]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Matt needs help and I hope he gets it, behind bars...he never deserves to live in a free society

It's not a matter of "deserves".

If he truly did not have the mental ability to make the decision to kill, prison is not considered to be a "penalty" for him. That would suggest that the penalty is being done to change his behaviour (next time he wont stab 5 people! serves him right).

Prison or whatever would be to isolate him from society since we're not sure if he has the ability (or meds have the ability) to allow him to control his actions and prevent him from being harmful to others.

I am bugged by everyone assuming that this was as simple as him pressing the on/off button in the remote like he woke up and said "I'm going to kill 5 people today"!

That's almost for sure not what happened. Maybe it is, we haven't established evidence for that. But it doesn't make sense. It probably is a mental disorder that we need to learn and understand better to make the proper conclusion. At the end of the day, I'm suggesting that "punishing" him is likely worthless, as there may not be anything to "punish". Punish him for what, having a brain disorder he is unable to control? That's akin to punishing a dog because he's stupid. I'm more concerned that until properly diagnosed and figuring this out, that no matter how you slice it he's obviously extremely harmful to society, and until we can have absolute certainty that whatever his issue can be controlled he needs to be removed from society in isolation.

[morgin]

Might have already been posted, but I hadn't read anything about the girl yet.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/ca...772/story.html

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Banner

It's easy to say he's a cold blooded murderer who decided to kill 5 people when you don't know him, because that's the only thing most people here know about him.

It's harder for people that know him to believe he is a cold blooded murderer. But they know just like everyone else that he is indeed a cold blooded murderer, as difficult as that may be to process.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Matt Reeeeead

It's not a matter of "deserves".

If he truly did not have the mental ability to make the decision to kill, prison is not considered to be a "penalty" for him. That would suggest that the penalty is being done to change his behaviour (next time he wont stab 5 people! serves him right).

Prison or whatever would be to isolate him from society since we're not sure if he has the ability (or meds have the ability) to allow him to control his actions and prevent him from being harmful to others.

I am bugged by everyone assuming that this was as simple as him pressing the on/off button in the remote like he woke up and said "I'm going to kill 5 people today"!

That's almost for sure not what happened. Maybe it is, we haven't established evidence for that. But it doesn't make sense. It probably is a mental disorder that we need to learn and understand better to make the proper conclusion. At the end of the day, I'm suggesting that "punishing" him is likely worthless, as there may not be anything to "punish". Punish him for what, having a brain disorder he is unable to control? That's akin to punishing a dog because he's stupid. I'm more concerned that until properly diagnosed and figuring this out, that no matter how you slice it he's obviously extremely harmful to society, and until we can have absolute certainty that whatever his issue can be controlled he needs to be removed from society in isolation.

I'm not worried about punishing the guy...I don't want him walking around free in the community where I raise my children