The writings of the person who killed three 9-year-olds and three adults at a private Christian elementary school in Nashville last year cannot be released to the public, a judge ruled Thursday.
Chancery Court Judge I’Ashea Myles found that The Covenant School children and parents hold the copyright to any writings or other works created by shooter Audrey Hale, a former student who was killed by police. As part of the effort to keep the records closed, Hale’s parents transferred ownership of Hale’s property to the victims’ families, who then argued in court that they should be allowed to determine who has access to them.
Myles agreed, ruling that “the original writings, journals, art, photos and videos created by Hale” are subject to an exception to the Tennessee Public Records Act created by the federal Copyright Act.
The shooter left behind at least 20 journals, a suicide note and a memoir, according to court filings. When the records requests were denied, several parties sued, and the situation quickly ballooned into a messy mix of conspiracy theories, leaked documents, probate battles and accusations of ethical misconduct. Myles’ order will almost surely be appealed.
Good.
We don’t need to feed Christianity’s martyr complex.
Just an endless search for justifications to be the victim. An endless desire to be the victim.
If the killer’s parents were approached by Fox/TMZ who wanted to turn just a few pages into some whacko documentary, would it be right to withhold the rest of the lunatic ramblings?
IDK how to feel about this, just know it’s weird
I know exactly how to feel about this- we shouldn’t be promoting the writings of a mass murderer. We should forget his name and just remember his victims.
And it seems like the parents of those victims agree.
The victims families own the copyright, not the killers parents.
They transferred ownership to the victims families so anyone looking to make money off of it would be paying the victims families.
I’m wondering about precedent. With my “if”, think “how would courts rule if in a future case …” or “how would we feel …”
(commented a little more in this thread as well)
The article states that the parents signed over the killer’s estate to the victims’ parents.
Which is why this case might feel fair to plenty of people. If you’re allowed to sign over an estate, though, and you sign it over to someone with a profit motive, maybe you’re allowed to essentially sell evidence the public is normally entitled to.
It’s based on the Son of Sam law and (likely) the killer’s family saw a way to alleviate the victim’s worries by signing over the rights.
Writings should be released to expose their motive. The judge could put an order any money made be given to the family. But the public is mature enough to read it.
Edit: Hollywood pumps out movies constantly with war and gun violence themes but suddenly we’re not mature enough to handle this? Or is it the writing of a bullied trans kid that bothers them so much? Well now we won’t know.
You’re missing the point entirely. Releasing the material was, presumptively, part of the shooters motivation. Increasing the notoriety of the perpetrator. Releasing the material would validate the shooters motives and encourage copycats. I don’t know why you would think that’s not enough.
How is this different from any other shooting where there is a manifesto left behind? This is nothing new and it is very common that they are released very shortly after the shooting.
-
It’s becoming less and less common. Stephen Paddocks motives weren’t released til 3 years or so later. If the Uvalde shooter had one it wasn’t released. Anything known about the Newtown shooter was found by journalists way later. The rest happen when the killer is still alive.
-
This is the only case that I know of where the killers writings are under control of the victims families.
They are released very quickly if they fit the desired political narrative, just look at the buffalo shooter and how quickly every major news article dove into his manifesto as soon as they got their hands on it. If and when it can be used to promote a specific view it is released, if it doesn’t promote the correct view it sits for a while until they can figure out how to spin it or the hype dies down and if it hurts the desired view it is blocked like this one.
I would also suggest that you never speak or write any of these assholes’ real names. The notoriety is what they seek and every time a stranger mentions them by name they get their wish.
Ask a question then reply telling me I’m wrong? Whatever doofus.
The Buffalo shooter also livestreamed part of his shooting on twitch, with a swastika on his weapon. The media getting information is significantly different than police releasing information. Assuming media orginaztions are in a conspiracy to push a narrative and not just squeezing every dime they can out of these tragedies is goofy. And I’m writing some of their names to demonstrate that my knowledge of these crime is a little beyond average.
I’d suggest you pull your head out of your ass.
The media are absolutely working together to push specific political viewpoints. This specific manifesto being blocked fits perfectly with the openly stated political goals of the majority of media in the US.
A judge in Tennessee is the one preventing the release of this manifesto. Media outlets are the ones trying to obtain it. Try again.
-
Presumptively
It is material was reviewed by a judge, the shooters family and the victims families. If you want to say it’s presumptively a manifesto and not almost definitely a manifesto. Then use that distinction to rationalize your point, congratulations.
With the recent rulings by judges (especially in conservative states) I have no faith in judicial review.
That’s apples and oranges. This shooter has the potential to be the Trans version of Elliot Rodgers. Trying to attach a christo-facist motivation to this ruling is a stretch and a half.
The motivations of mass killers isn’t really relevant for anything. People capable of that level of violence are such an anomaly that other indicators are more important, from a psychological perspective, than their self-determined motives.
Largest mass killer in us history was the Vegas shooter, Stephen Paddock. His motivation was that he was feeling slighted by the casinos for not getting enough perks for being a “big spender”. What is a psychologist supposed to do with that for helping prevent other mass shooters? Trying to attach some silence of the lambs bullshit to crimes like this is foolish. Even then, that’s the FBI doing it which then can be trickled out to medical journals etc. The best thing for the public is for these killer to be remembered as dead monsters.
motivation to this ruling is a stretch and a half
You’re presuming again, everything you said
Presuming how? My main point is that the shooters motivations is mostly irrelevant and releasing their writings dould encourage copycats. Like we actually saw with Elliot Rodgers.
What am I presuming?
It’s not about the public’s ‘rights’ tho. It’s about the victims’ families and their rights … which in this case the judge decided on the side of the families.
I for one am glad of that because it gives the families at least some sense of control over a situation they originally had zero control over.
Gun regulation is control which is declined.
A judge Giving away first amendment rights seems wrong. Making an “exception” to a law made specifically for this.
Seems to me it would only be blocked if it was embarrassing. Everyone in the shooters life could’ve failed them because they’re ’good Christian’s’. The kid could’ve also been insane but now we won’t know will we.
Ok. So how would you personally benefit from the killer’s writings being publically released?
Maybe I wouldn’t send my trans kid to that school if it’s a place known for fostering hate.
The school’s name was already published. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Nashville_school_shooting
That doesn’t tell the public anything about why a shooting occurred.
You stated that knowing the school’s name would help you. The school’s name is public. Therefore your ‘want’ has been fulfilled.
Maybe my would-be killer gets caught because their psychologist studied the killer’s writings and noticed a troubling pattern.
I don’t want even more manifestos glorified and memed on 4chan. I’m cognizant there’s generally a reason horrible things see the light of the public eye.
Body cam footage of someone’s worst moments of their life… release it, violate one person’s privacy, keep one officer/department accountable, public has to weigh that tradeoff.
Even releasing lottery winners’ names ruins lives, but otherwise some would assume the lottery’s fraudulent (money going to politicians’ friends)… instead of just a tax on the poor 🌈
None of that tells me how you would personally benefit from this killer’s writings being published.
Not dying:
Maybe my would-be killer gets caught because their psychologist studied the killer’s writings and noticed a troubling pattern.
Guy wants to kill me. Guy complains about me to their therapist without mentioning killing me. Therapist thinks “wait, this sounds like something I’ve read…”
And what they read was some lunatic’s writings that were released. Therapist is then able to report their concerns via appropriate channels and medicates my would-be killer, and I live another day.
That is crap. What-ifs don’t benefit you directly like that.
There is absolutely zero reason that the judge erred in his ruling.
You just want to feed your snoopy gene. Nothing else.
this sounds like ai generated bs for the onion but goddamn if we haven’t arrived lol jesus
