A Dark Night in Aurora

by Dr. William H. Reid

  My opinions about Holmes’s legal sanity were similar to Dr. Metzner’s: as of July 20, 2012, Holmes did not suffer from a mental disease or defect that prevented him from forming a culpable mental state. Regardless of any mental disorder or psychiatric symptoms he may have had at those relevant times, he knew that his shootings and killings would be, and were, illegal and socially wrong. He knew that others, including law enforcement officers and his psychiatrists, would try to stop him if they were aware of what he was planning to do. He knew the consequences to others, and to himself, of his actions, and he knowingly intended to carry them out in spite of their illegality and those likely consequences. He also understood the moral—as contrasted with legal—wrongfulness of his shootings and killings.

  My reasoning in forming those opinions went something like this:

  Holmes told people before and after the shootings, and wrote in his notebook, that he expected to be killed or arrested, and if arrested, he would either go to prison or be executed. He kept his specific thoughts, plans, and shooting practice secret; he didn’t divulge details that might have led others to interfere with them. Although he broached the subject of wishing to kill people with his girlfriend and his treating clinicians beforehand, he kept the topic abstract, sometimes saying he didn’t want to be “locked up” (in a hospital). Those are actions of a person who knows that such behavior is wrong.

  He planned and implemented methods of distraction and escape. He booby-trapped his apartment and had road stars in his car to deter police in the event of a vehicle chase.

  He specifically chose a location and methods that would lead to lots of victims, with little chance that he could be stopped before killing many people. He planned ways to contain his would-be victims and incapacitate them (such as by using tear gas and handcuffing the upper exit doors shut),2 armed himself with several weapons and a great deal of ammunition, planned ways to keep people from stopping him, and protected himself with body armor and a gas mask.

  He carried out his mission deliberately and methodically, not haphazardly. He came to the theater calmly, went through the lobby as if he were an ordinary patron, and perpetrated a ruse—the faked cell phone call—to disguise his leaving to get the weapons and equipment. He suited up in a carefully parked car with windows that were darkly tinted and used a preplanned method of holding the exit door open so that he could reenter the theater. After the mission was over, he considered shooting the two policemen he saw outside the theater but decided that it would be safer for him to surrender.

  According to Holmes’s later statements, admittedly made well after the shootings and after his November 2012 psychotic break, he was willing to sacrifice both those who would be killed (people whose value he thought he would accrue and whose deaths might make him less depressed) and those who would be injured (whom he called unfortunate “collateral damage”) in an effort to make himself feel better. He knew beforehand that such actions would be selfish, trading their lives and well-being for a chance that he would benefit.

  Holmes never implied that the moral relativism he espoused, and with which he continued to justify the killings to himself, was an acceptable reason to kill nor that others would consider his acts moral. He did not suggest that others must, would, or should accept his philosophy.

  My primary diagnosis was a condition called schizotypal personality disorder. Schizotypal personality is characterized by a chronic, pervasive pattern of social and interpersonal deficits marked by acute discomfort with, and reduced capacity for, close relationships, and by distortions of thinking and perception.3 The traits usually appear by early adulthood, often in childhood or adolescence.

  The diagnosis requires that most of the following, but not necessarily all, be present over a long period of time: thoughts that other people’s words or actions refer to oneself; odd beliefs or magical thinking; unusual perceptual experiences, such as bodily illusions; odd thinking and speech; suspiciousness or paranoid thinking; inappropriate or limited affect (facial and emotional expression); odd, eccentric, or peculiar appearance or behavior; lack of close friends other than family; and excessive social anxiety that doesn’t improve with familiarity. Psychotic symptoms may occur in schizotypal personality, but they are brief; otherwise, a different disorder should be diagnosed.

  Schizotypal personality is lifelong. It has no cure, although treatment may alleviate some of the symptoms. When I saw him, Holmes appeared to be responding marginally well to a medication designed to alleviate psychosis from any source (low doses of risperidone) and to one for anxiety and depression (escitalopram). The natural course of the disorder is generally stable, but extraordinary stressors can cause more symptoms, including acute psychosis. A small number of people with schizotypal personality later develop schizophrenia and similar conditions. Both schizophrenia and schizotypal personality have genetic components; they, and similar disorders and symptoms, sometimes run in families.

  I did not find, and don’t believe today, that Holmes met accepted psychiatric criteria for a diagnosis of schizophrenia or its even more serious cousin, schizoaffective disorder, at the time of the shootings. All three other psychiatrists who examined him after the incident disagreed with me, but I could not fit his clinical history and known symptoms before July 20, 2012, into the rather specific criteria for that diagnosis. That doesn’t imply that he wasn’t seriously mentally ill or that he did not meet those criteria later, nor did it per se exclude him from being found not guilty by reason of insanity. I have no doubt that Holmes was mentally ill for months, perhaps years, before the shootings, but whatever his diagnosis at the time, the evidence was overwhelming that his symptoms didn’t prevent him from forming criminal intent.

  In his preshooting notebook, Holmes gave himself several mental and physical diagnoses. In spite of his self-diagnosing things like dysphoric mania, there was little real indication in the record or from witnesses that he suffered from the disorders he speculated, such as severe clinical depression or significant mood instability, during the months before the shootings. There is evidence that he felt depressed at various times. He may or may not have had significant suicidal thoughts before the shootings, but he was clear with me that he didn’t recall any, and there is no indication that he ever planned or attempted suicide. (His childhood scratches with cardboard, described in an earlier chapter, should not be considered a suicide attempt.)

  Feeling depressed is not the same as having clinical depression. When one compares the preshooting record to professionally accepted criteria for major depressive episodes, for example, the evidence just isn’t there.

  The judge’s order to me also posed a number of questions raised by the defense and the prosecution after the lawyers for both sides read Dr. Metzner’s report. Each question was viewed by the judge as relevant to the question of Holmes’s sanity, and thus to his insanity defense. They included further exploration of:

  • Holmes’s “human capital” beliefs and comparing them to his early thoughts of killing, perhaps as an ideology;

  • his thoughts about right and wrong and whether they were related to a philosophy (such as that of Friedrich Nietzsche) or to psychotic thoughts;

  • whether or not Holmes’s belief that he was delusional and psychotic (as written in his notebook before the shootings) reflected his actual mental condition;

  • what Holmes described in some writings as “hatred of mankind” and whether or not that was a potential motive for the shootings;

  • Holmes’s reference to having two different selves and whether that represented either severe mental illness or manipulation;

  • the possible delusions and paranoid symptoms described by his treating psychiatrist and other experts;

  • Dr. Metzner’s opinion that the shootings would not have occurred if Holmes had not suffered from a chronic psychotic illness;

  • explanations for Holmes’s comments about keeping his killings “impersonal”;

  • Dr. Metzner’s findi
ng that Holmes’s appreciation of the wrongfulness of his actions was significantly impaired (clinically, but not to the extent of removing Holmes’s responsibility for his actions—this item doesn’t completely reflect the wording in Dr. Metzner’s report); and

  • Holmes’s violent fantasies since childhood, as well as a purported “warrior mentality” concept raised by one of the expert psychologists.

  At the risk of being repetitive, here are my responses to Judge Samour:

  Holmes’s human capital concept, that purposely killing others gave him some kind of additional value, appears to have begun during graduate school. His memories of it just before the shootings were that he receives an arbitrary and abstract “point” for every person he kills. Although he likes having the points, he did not associate them with any measurable advantage such as a longer life, a more enjoyable life, additional lives, or the like.

  His ideas of human capital are from his own thoughts, not from some external source, voice, or higher power. He denied that they came directly from any philosopher (such as Nietzsche), movie (such as Highlander), television program, or game. He said that accidental killings don’t count toward one’s value. Children convey the same value to their killers as do adults—one of the people he killed and several of the injured were under seventeen. Wounded or injured persons don’t count. In his scheme of things, if he were to be executed, the executioner would get one point, but only if the executioner believes as he does.

  I found no indication that Holmes’s human capital belief was directly or consciously associated with any childhood thoughts of killing people, to the extent that he may actually have had such specific thoughts as a child. It’s not uncommon for small children to have occasional thoughts of death or even of killing. There is no indication that any childhood thoughts represented an “ideology” for him.

  With regard to whether Holmes’s occasional comments about there being no right or wrong were philosophical, delusional, or something else, Holmes said he viewed moral right and wrong as matters of individual choice; they’re whatever a person thinks they are. After some circular-sounding rationalization, he agreed that a society whose members can do anything they believe is right or expedient would be very problematic, but he stuck doggedly to his premise.

  That doggedness in the face of logical pathways to social chaos is reminiscent of the unshakeable beliefs of a delusion, but it isn’t delusional, because it’s not a belief about how the world is, but about how he thinks the world should be. Those beliefs, assuming they really were his beliefs, were part of an entrenched, asocial philosophy, not a delusion. He knew that society would view the shootings as legally and morally wrong.

  Holmes’s comments to a couple of friends and in his preshooting notebook that he was psychotic or delusional, and any insight he may have had into his mental condition before the shootings, were relevant to his insanity defense. The record indicates his concern about both his mental condition and the mission (cf. the sort of hide-and-seek he played with social worker Roath and Drs. Fenton and Feinstein). Like many other people, he looked for explanations on the Internet, hoping the violent part of him could be controlled.

  That having been said, and agreeing that he thought there was something wrong with him, there is no firm indication that Holmes actually thought that his plan for killing people was “crazy.” He referred to “the mind of madness,” but I think those words were dramatic, hyperbole, not a real insight. He didn’t think at the time that killing others was a sign of psychosis, though he accurately believed that telling others about his plans would get him hospitalized, and part of him believed the killings should not be carried out. He hoped Dr. Fenton would somehow recognize the danger. He thought, and subconsciously hoped, that the FBI might stop him at the last minute. An ambivalent part of him called the university’s mental health hotline halfway through gearing up to go back into the theater. He told me, and I believe, that the part of him that wanted to carry out the mission was simply stronger than the part that wanted to stop it.

  Holmes’s obsessive thoughts, beginning in early adolescence, of hating mankind and killing masses of people were more ominous, and were probably associated with the psychological conditions that would eventually lead to the shootings. Their source is a matter of speculation. It would be illogical to assume those thoughts were harbingers of some future psychotic illness such as schizophrenia. They are consistent with it, but in the same sense that some headaches are consistent with, but not necessarily associated with, brain tumors.

  Exploring Holmes’s purported hatred of mankind was also part of my task for the Court. Anger, hatred, and revenge motives create specific exceptions to Colorado’s insanity defense statute. If the prosecution could show that hatred was a substantial motive, the defense’s case would crumble.

  Although Holmes’s notebook seems to refer to hatred in connection with his plan to kill people (“… to face death, embrace the long-standing hatred of mankind and overcome all fear in certain death”), he consistently denied, in his interviews with me, hatred as a significant motivator. James Holmes the graduate student often viewed mankind as noxious but “like hating broccoli” rather than hating in a vicious or malevolent way. He said that if there had been any motivation from that hating, it was small, perhaps 10 percent, compared with his main purposes of alleviating depression and avoiding suicide, and of gaining value from the deceased victims.

  One can’t be completely sure that version was accurate. He had sometimes told other people that his hatred of mankind was more than simple aversion.

  HOLMES: “I wrote ‘hatred of mankind’ in a notebook … kind of like hating broccoli or something. Not a fiery, angry, passionate hate.”

  REID: “Tell me about the ‘hating broccoli’ kind of hatred of mankind.”

  HOLMES: “Well, I just don’t want to eat broccoli so I kind of avoid it—be averse to it—instead of being like angry at broccoli and like chopping it up or something.”

  REID: “How does that translate to a feeling about mankind, then?”

  HOLMES: “The hatred? I think it’s just because I’m different [inaudible] hatred towards mankind. It’s more of being averse to mankind, kind of wanting to be alone, solitary.”

  The court’s question about what Holmes meant when he spoke of having two different selves referred to whether or not there was evidence of things like multiple personality (known in mental health fields as “dissociative identity disorder”). There wasn’t. There was no reasonable indication that Holmes ever had two different selves. Holmes’s statements of being “on autopilot” during the shootings were often misconstrued as indicating a dissociated state, like being an automaton and perhaps psychotic. Whatever he meant, Holmes’s own descriptions of the events inside Auditorium 9 indicate that he was quite aware of his surroundings and actions and has a good memory of them. Such memories aren’t consistent with true dissociative states.

  I was asked to examine the paranoid symptoms and possible delusions described by Dr. Fenton, particularly whether or not Holmes ever had ideas or delusions “of reference” (a belief that others’ ordinary words or actions, such as in news broadcasts or song lyrics, somehow refer personally to oneself). There is some indication that Holmes had ideas or delusions of reference prior to the shootings, but the record is far from conclusive about their forensic significance. There were no known consistent or pervasive referential delusions before the shootings.

  Dr. Fenton had described Holmes as paranoid and noted three referential misinterpretations of ordinary events that could have suggested delusions. In one, Holmes suspected that she was afraid of him because he found her office door locked when he arrived for an appointment. He thought that the door was locked because of him. Later that day, he suspected that a bag or box behind her desk might contain a weapon for protecting herself from him. In a subsequent session, he speculated that a sling or cast on Dr. Feinstein’s arm was either a test to see if he (Holmes) would be empathic or a r
use to conceal a weapon, both possibilities referring specifically, and quite improbably, to him. Holmes’s later thoughts that the FBI may have been surveilling him as he implemented his mission plans were ambiguous. They were consistent with a delusion but also with simple caution and worry about getting caught, and with a wish to be stopped.

  The Court also asked about “thought broadcasting,” a delusion in which one believes that others can hear or sense his or her thoughts, which had been brought up by one of the other experts. Nothing in either the record or my interviews suggested preshooting delusions of thought broadcasting.

  Dr. Metzner’s opinion that the shootings were a direct result of a chronic psychotic illness became another subject for my evaluation. My point, which did not disagree with Metzner’s, was that however Holmes’s mental disorder was diagnosed, it would be silly to say that the shootings would have occurred without it. But the question of legal sanity hinges on how a defendant functions at the time of the event, not the “but for” question of his or her disease or defect. That is, in legal parlance, if there hadn’t been a “mental disease,” the shootings would not have occurred.

  It’s a little like transferring all the blame from Holmes to the stores that sold him the weapons, or to the weapons’ manufacturers, or to the Colorado law that prevented the doctors who tried to help him from committing him to a mental hospital. If the stores hadn’t sold the weapons, if the manufacturers hadn’t made them, if the psychiatrists had been able to read his mind or the law had made it easy to hospitalize people against their wills, then the shootings wouldn’t have happened. Those may be true statements, but they did not alter Holmes’s ability to intend criminal behavior, and neither did his mental disorder.