Points of view on rampaging professor

Amy Bishop, as a professor of biology at the University of Alabama Huntsville, with a doctorate from Harvard would seem like an unlikely criminal. Yet on February 13, 2010 she killed 3 of her colleagues and wounded 3 others at a faculty meeting.

In reading a blog about her (see: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/22/genius-madness-and-tenure/?scp=2&sq=amy%20bishop%20blog&st=cse) it is apparent that she can be seen through many lenses.

As a bully, Ms Bishop sees herself as a victim. This "victim" "rightfully" strikes out against her "oppressors". A poster to the above referenced blog supposes that her brother sexually abused her, justifying his murder. A very few feminists assert men’s historical dominating position and greater physical strength are relevant in this case. A professor did not give her Ms Bishop her rightful grade, possibly "justifying" a mail bomb. Another mother at IHOP received Ms Bishop’s "righteous" fist for taking the last booster seat at IHOP. And most recently her professorial colleagues at UAH "wrongfully" denied her tenure, leading to her ultimate act of violence.

As a creature, her actions are determined by the output of her brain, which can be viewed as advanced biological computer. The brain is a product of its genetic makeup (including chemistry) and experiences. (Since men are generally more violent, testosterone can play a role.) By analogy, a computer’s output is a function of its physical construction, its programming, and its input. By this model, Ms Bishop is no more responsible for her actions than a wayward computer. Some posters to this blog with a better technical appreciation of these influences name psychological diagnoses of her state and cite aspects of her makeup and history that led to her actions.

Viewing Ms Bishop as an evil person, a believer might say that she did not follow a Godly path; she was smitten by the devil. The believer may assert that yet even she has the grace of God.

Many, if not most of us, view her simply as a very bad person with cunning and guile. Her path of destruction seems to have begun with her brother’s apparent murder (although it may have began earlier) and led ultimately to her killing or wounding six colleagues at UAH. (It must be noted that these were or are wonderful people within their communities and their families, which makes this tragedy especially poignant. Of course, murder and mayhem are always tragic.) There were people in her past – enablers, including parents, a police chief, prosecutors, judges, and her husband – who did not stop her earlier. Clearly she must be stopped now.

I, as many of the others, feel that her actions merit a severe punishment. This has the logic of deterrence, balance, and justice. It prevents her from causing future harm. However, mostly it just seems right and appropriate.