Pseudocommando II PDF
Pseudocommando II PDF
Pseudocommando II PDF
A N D
C O M M E N T A R Y
offender would not have bothered to write or communicate his manifesto unless it had great personal
meaning. In the cases that will be examined, both
offenders took the time and effort to craft and then
deliver their communications to television news media, suggesting that they believed their communications contained important information for others.
If we accept the working hypothesis that these
communications are highly meaningful to the
pseudocommando, we may examine them for what
they reveal about his motives, psychological state,
and a wealth of other data. Through careful forensic
psycholinguistic analysis, it is possible to discern personality variables, cognitive styles, and the presence
of certain types of mental illness.4 Analysis may also
suggest important information, such as educational
level, religious orientation, and cultural background.
Psychiatrists are in a unique position to analyze written communications for different forms of mental
illness, such as schizophrenia,5 depression,6 and
other types of emotional turmoil. For example, it has
been suggested that the excessive use of pronouns is
associated with high levels of psychological distress.7
The use of metaphor or metonymy may also contain
clues about an individuals history, ethnic background, primary motivations, and level of distress.8
Data as seemingly inconsequential as an e-mail address may suggest clues about personality structure.9
263
Knoll
that pseudocommandos who were captured alive referred to other infamous cases of mass murder.
Strikingly, Mr. Cho realized he had other options.
Unfortunately, he had become too deeply invested in
his revenge romance:
I didnt have to do it. I could have left. I could have fled. But
now I am no longer running.17
265
These accusations are interesting because they involve the concept of death, specifically his death, and
suggest that the idea of death was present in Mr.
Chos ruminations. Going a step further, these communications may suggest that he felt, affectively, existentially, or even delusionally, that he was already
dead. The comparison to the heroic Christ figure is
again present in his remarks about being impaled on
a cross, as well as an extreme degree of splitting in his
assertion that his victims had never felt a single
ounce of pain. Note, too, the phrase our lives,
which is consistent with his earlier statements that he
believes he is not alone in his victimhood. Yet there is
no evidence, in reality, that he was ever able to connect with a group of disaffected, unhappy individuals. Thus, he creates this group from whole cloth, as
it bolsters his hero fantasy, and provides comfort via
the notions that there is strength in numbers and he
does not suffer alone.
The following statements give the best insight into
Mr. Chos paranoid-schizoid dynamics:
You had everything you wanted. Your Mercedes wasnt
enough, you brats. Your golden necklaces werent enough,
you snobs. Your trust fund wasnt enough. Your vodka and
cognac wasnt enough. All your debaucheries werent
enough. Those werent enough to fulfill your hedonistic
needs. You had everything. . . .17
Knoll
267
ders. A final possibility is simple sarcasm and mockery, as when Atlanta mass murderer Mark Barton
said in his final communication, I hope this doesnt
ruin your trading day.29 However, given the sincere,
straightforward tone observed in the rest of his letter,
the possibility of sarcasm seems less likely for all but
the last statement, which appears at the very end of
the letter.
Mr. Wongs letter gets right to the point from the
beginning:
Of course you need to know why I shooting? Because undercover cop gave me a lot of ass during eighteen years.28
This passage suggests that his persecutory delusions took on a more threatening and invasive nature.
His persecutor is no longer harassing him from a
distance, but has actually invaded his personal space.
This change may represent a more severe decompensation of ego functioning: his persecutor has metaphorically broken through his fragmented defenses.
Because of his deficient English, it is difficult to discern conclusively whether he meant to say that the
cop entered his room and sat down, or the cop defecated (take a sit) in his room. The former implies a
menacing and brazen invasion of privacy, while the
latter adds an element of outrageous degradation.
Also note that his persecutor has progressed to the
level of actually touching him. These more invasive,
threatening delusions suggest a worsening of his illness, and evidence of this worsening continues over
time. For example, the following statement: One
time [cop] stolen 20 dollar in my wallet. One time
used electric gun shoot at the behind my neck,28
indicates a continuation of his invasive, highly persecutory delusions.
It also appears as though Mr. Wong believed that
there was a collaboration or conspiracy between the
undercover cop in California, and the one in New
York: Many time from 1990 to 1997. . . . Spread a
rumor nasty like the California Cop.28 He made
other statements suggesting that he believed these
rumors caused him terrible misfortune, such as losing
his job and being treated poorly by others. Feelings of
cultural marginalization associated with paranoid delusion also appear to have played a role. For example,
he states, . . . one time Cop leave a massage in my
voice mail and said [come back your country].28
Finally, we see that he has reached the obliterative
Knoll
Like Mr. Cho, he reveals briefly his own decimated self-esteem (his poor life). However, unlike
Mr. Cho, he does not take the route of turning his
plans and actions into a heroic revenge fantasy.
Rather, he simply puts forth his nihilistic state of
mind and desire for revenge. After enduring more
persecution than he can tolerate, he is unable to envision that his life will ever be different. He believes
that his life is a poor one, suggesting aversive selfawareness, and the only escape he is able to conceive
of is suicide. However, he has been horribly mistreated, and his suicide alone would leave an unjust
lack of balance (impartial, i.e., fair or unbiased).34 Thus, a vengeful judgment must be passed.
Or in his words, his persecutor must be held responsible. But his persecutor(s) are undercover,
and cannot be identified. A substitute group must be
chosen. He leaves us with a message that might be
reformulated as: I want others to hurt like I do
maybe then my persecutors will be held responsible.
There are two unanswered questions in the case of
Mr. Wong: why did he choose the American Civic
Center, and why did he kill 13 people when he gives
the more modest number of at least two in his
letter? His choice of the American Civic Center may
be the missing expression of envy, one that he simply
failed to allude to in his letter. Immigrants learning
English at the Civic Center may have represented his
lost hope for success in the United States. His envy of
others who were achieving what he had so desperately wanted may have been a driving force in his
choice to destroy those he saw as potentially enjoying this goal. Finally, it may be that because of his
language skills and cultural background, his letter did
not communicate the full extent of the rage and hostility he had been harboring. Thus, while he writes
about killing at least two people, he brought with
him more than enough ammunition to kill that
many and more (Zikuski J). The police investigation
found that Mr. Wong had been able to fire an unusually high number of rounds in a very brief time
and with startling accuracy (Zikuski J). It may be
speculated that he could have killed in excess of 13,
but chose to shoot himself when he heard approaching police sirens. It is also possible that from the time
he authored his letter until the time he performed the
shootings (two weeks later), his violent revenge fantasy was intensified by isolative rumination. Thus,
at least two began to grow in number, and the
phrasing at least seems to foreshadow this
outcome.
Discussion
Both Mr. Cho and Mr. Wong committed mass
murder as defined by the present-day Bureau of Justice definition. Both killed four or more victims at
one location, within one event. Both men followed
the pattern of the pseudocommando, in that they
were heavily armed, wore warrior gear, committed
the act during the day, planned for the act, and expected to be killed. The final communications of
both men also revealed that they harbored strong
emotions of anger, feelings of persecution, and severely damaged self-esteem. Both willingly plunged
into death and destruction in pursuit of revenge.
Both had reached the obliterative mindset in which
nothing matters, and violent annihilation must be
the final outcome.
It is in analyzing their final communications that
the striking differences between the two are revealed.
Mr. Wongs final letter strongly suggests that he had
a major psychotic disorder. Even more weight is
added to this possibility by his fathers report of psychotic symptoms beginning in Mr. Wongs early 20s.
Although he was resentful about the status of his
poor life, he attributed all his misfortunes to a bizarre, delusional persecution by an undercover
cop. In effect, his invisible persecutor(s) (his psychotic illness) had destroyed his chances of assimilating and working successfully in the country to which
he had immigrated. For approximately two decades,
Mr. Wong had felt that he had been subjected to
cruel and humiliating harassment. Upon reaching
the obliterative state of mind, he reasoned that he
would no longer be the passive recipient of persecution. Instead, he would assume the role of persecutor
and punishing judge. In his case, we see much less
overt envy expressed in his final communication.
Rather, his letter dwells mainly on his persecutory
delusions and his plan to commit homicide-suicide
because of his aversive self-awareness (i.e., his unacceptable, poor life).
269
In contrast, Mr. Chos final communications afford a clear view into the psychodynamics of envy
and social exclusion. He goes so far as to acknowledge
his desire to be part of the hedonistic crowd that he
imagined had unlimited access to lifes pleasures. His
manifesto does not contain any overtly delusional
thoughts, although one may argue that his feelings of
persecution may have reached delusional or near delusional levels. However, with Mr. Cho, there is no
evidence of bizarre or technological delusions, and
his mental health evaluations of 2005 did not find
any psychotic symptoms. Rather, his letter is rife
with externalization, splitting, and rage flowing from
his feelings of social exclusion. His letter also contains more direct and overt expression of vitriolic
anger than does Mr. Wongs letter. But perhaps the
biggest difference is Mr. Chos grandiose view of his
act as a heroic sacrifice. He stresses that his own
death will not be in vain, as he is sacrificing himself to
save the weak and the defenseless. This theme
hints at the way he saw himself, as a pathetic boy
whose life (and self-esteem) had been extinguished
by his feelings of social exclusion.
A final contrast between the two is obvious in the
photographs that they sent to the media. Whereas
the photographs sent by Mr. Wong consisted mainly
of him sitting down and holding a gun pointed upward, Mr. Chos were more numerous and clearly
posed for dramatic impact. In sum, Mr. Chos photos suggest substantially more drama and grandiosity, as well as suicidal cognitions. These data, taken
together with the writings, suggest that Mr. Wongs
primary pathology may have been a major psychotic
disorder (along with a possible depressive disorder),
whereas Mr. Chos primary psychopathology may
have been characterological (along with depressive
and anxiety spectrum disorders). I do not mean to
exclude the possibility that Mr. Cho had begun to
have a thought disorder; however, the evidence for
such a disorder is far less striking than for Mr. Wong.
Prevention
The unpleasant truth is that such events are extremely hard to prevent.35 Recommendations may
represent hopeful or idealistic goals, while the reality
is that such events may occur without obvious opportunities for deterrence. Retrospectively, one may
sometimes discover windows of opportunity that if
taken advantage of, could have diverted the course of
events leading up to the tragedy. Family members or
270
Knoll
References
1. Zizek S: Violence. New York: Picador, 2008
2. Hempel A, Meloy J, Richards T: Offender and offense characteristics of a nonrandom sample of mass murderers. J Am Acad
Psychiatry Law 27:21325, 1999
3. Pennebaker J, Mehl M, Niederhoffer K: Psychological aspects of
natural language use: our words, our selves. Annu Rev Psychol
54:54777, 2003
4. Smith S, Shuy R: Forensic psycholinguistics: using language analysis for identifying and assessing offenders. FBI Law Enforcement
Bull 71:16 21, 2002
5. Stephane M, Pellizzer G, Fletcher CR, et al: Empirical evaluation
of language disorder in schizophrenia. J Psychiatry Neurosci 32:
250 8, 2007
6. Pennebaker JW, Stone LD: What was she trying to say?a linguistic analysis of Katies Diaries, in Katies Diary: Unlocking the
Mystery of a Suicide. Edited by Lester D. New York: Routledge
Press, 2003, pp 5579
271
272