Should authorities “protect” the public from the thoughts of violent criminals?
Do victims’ families have a legitimate claim to suppress public records regarding assailants’ deeds?
Should knowledge of criminals’ actions be made public for the purposes of study and trying to prevent future similar crimes?
And should government officials have neither the right nor the credibility to stand in the way?
This from reason.com.
These questions arise as some people seek to deter mass attacks by denying attention to perpetrators—especially in incidents that may involve controversies over ideology, culture, and policy.
The debate over releasing the Covenant School shooter’s manifesto is the most recent such example, and like all of them it should be resolved by acknowledging the public’s right to know.
After the lethal March 27 shooting at the Covenant School in Nashville, Tennessee, police revealed that the attacker, Audrey Hale, left behind a written record of preliminaries to the crime.
Metropolitan Nashville police announced April 3:
In the collective writings by Hale found in her vehicle in the school parking lot, and others later found in the bedroom of her home, she documented, in journals, her planning over a period of months to commit mass murder at The Covenant School.
The writings remain under careful review by the MNPD and the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit based in Quantico, Virginia.
The motive for Hale’s actions has not been established and remains under investigation by the Homicide Unit in consultation with the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit. It is known that Hale considered the actions of other mass murderers.
At issue here: The authorities have refused to provide any clarity.
According to The Tennessean, which is among those seeking the release of the documents:
Tennessee Bureau of Investigations Director David Rausch referred to Hale’s documents as ‘ramblings’ rather than writings that point to a clear motive.
But Metro Nashville Council Member Courtney Johnston said the documents were:
[A] blueprint on total destruction, and it was so, so detailed at the level of what she had planned.
NOTE: Reconciling those characterizations—without access to the documents—is impossible for We the People in this period of plummeting trust in institutions. Members of the public want to decide for themselves rather than leave dueling officials to agree on a course of action.
But this is not happening, at least so far. After dragging their feet on releasing the documents, Nashville police refused:
[P]erversely blaming continuing delays on lawsuits and administrative appeals seeking access to the writings.
So, the Nashville police are comfortably claiming inability to release the documents based on simultaneous requests to release the documents and not release the documents.
Further muddying the water, the Covenant School sued to prevent release, claiming the documents:
[M]ay include and/or relate to sensitive information owned by The Covenant School.
And just last week, Hale’s parents sought to distance themselves from the dispute by transferring ownership of the documents to victims’ families. The families hope the move will bolster their efforts to suppress Hale’s writings, though that may be a faint hope given that they’re in police possession and the product of a murderer who committed a crime of public concern.
Needless to say, whether to release or not release the documents is a complicated matter. No doubt members of the public are concerned. Multiple organizations, including two media outlets, are suing for access to information about the high-profile murders.
Was Hale motivated by anti-Christian bias? By childhood experiences as an alumnus of the school? By earlier school shooters? Did the debate over trans identity play a role? What about self-defense rights and access to firearms? Did Hale take common security measures into account and plan around them? And what about mental illness and the effects of any drugs Hale may have been prescribed and taking to assist transition from her biological gender to her assumed gender?
There is sufficient reason for researchers, reporters, activists, and people in general to want to have access to what Hale left behind.
Hiding documents from the public and saying, “trust us, you don’t need to see this,” is certainly not an acceptable gesture for We the People at this time of minimal to zero trust in our elected and appointed officials. The people asking for access to Hale’s manifesto (or “ramblings”) obviously have more faith in their own judgment about the writings’ importance than in that of officialdom.
That’s especially true when Hale’s documents may be relevant to ongoing debates. Anti-gun activists have already tried to build a case for restrictive laws on the crime. Others insist the murderer was motivated by anger over the treatment of trans people. And there are those of us who see mental illness and the cocktail of drugs typically prescribed to assist gender transitioning as a likely culprit.
People deserve to know what the documents contain. Suppressing the documents makes everyone suspect the worst about their contents.
Whatever is in the writings, the public has the right to see them. And government officials have neither the right nor the credibility to stand in the way.
