Fact Check Cullen's book

thank you so much for doing this!!!

They actually think it’s a good book, but it’s the only time they ever research the case.

Though On another book club some survivors who were freshman say that they thought it was accurate. They said Eric and Dylan were never bullied When I asked them if they knew them or any of their friends they said no

Chapter 38-
This is all about Cassie Bernall. The stuff she went through before coming to Columbine, the conflicts with her parents, and her transformation after a Christian retreat.
I think most of it is accurate from what I remember of She Said Yes.

He gets Val Schnurr's encounter with Dylan a bit wrong. Cullen says she only said yes when Dylan asked her if she believed. Val and several other witnesses said initially she told him no, and then she changed it to yes. Most of the witnesses felt she was just trying to say whatever she thought would not get her shot again.
He details how the whole Cassie martyr thing never happened and how Misty Bernall was writing She Said Yes even while details were coming out that suggested it wasn't true.

Chapter 39-
More about how Eric's writing illustrates how he thought he was vastly superior to the world
He talks of how Eric referred to people as robots just following orders and Dylan referred to them as zombies. How Eric looked down on others but how Dylan "looked on the zombies compassionately; Dylan yearned for the poor little creatures to break out of their boxes."

Ok, now that you're finished gagging. Let's look at what Dylan REALLY said about zombies:
-  I am GOD compared to some of these un-existable, brainless zombies.
- most morons never change - they never decide to live in the 'everything' frame of mind.
- why is it that the zombies achieve something me wants (overdeveloped me). They can love, why can't i?
- The zombies & their society band together & try to destroy what is superior & what they don't understand & are afraid of. Soon... either ill commit suicide, or I'll get w. [edited] & it will be NBK for us.
- Almost happiness in slavery -- the real people (gods) are slaves to the majority of zombies, but we know & love being superior.
- By the way, some zombies are smarter than others, some manipulate... like my parents.) I am God. [edited] is God. & zombies will pay for their arrogance, hate, fear, abandonment, & distrust.
- I will overcome all fears, doubts, & zombie-based thoughts (oxymoron)
- The zombies have set their place in my mind. for the cliff theory, Ive jumped off w. [arrow down to] [edited] & we've floated away to the halcyon. the zombies will pay for their being, their nature
- This shit again. back at writing doing just like a fucking zombie. Lately I cant change my mind from the fucking deeds of zombies
- the zombies will never cause us pain anymore. the humanity was a test.
- The little zombie human fags will know their errors, & be forever suffering & mournful, HAHAHA

Awww, sweet little Dylan is so compassionate over the zombies. SMFH.

And, Fuselier decided after just one hour of reading Eric's journal that he was a psychopath.

Imagine getting that Dylan had compassion for the people he felt below him because he referred to them as zombies not robots. Cullen is wild.

Chapter 40-
This is the chapter in which he tries to prove that Eric is a psychopath. Since I disagree with this wholeheartedly, please excuse the length of this post, but I think it's important to show people who maybe haven't been through the whole 11k, etc. to see the other side of what Cullen is claiming.
[Disclaimer: It will appear as though I am defending Eric in some of this post. Please be clear- I think what he and Dylan did was beyond terrible and is inexcusable. I am not pro-Eric or pro-Dylan, I am pro- truth and figuring out why kids like them do these things].

He starts by saying Fuselier recognized Eric as a psychopath right away and then spent the next 12 weeks trying to refute this diagnosis but could not.

Cullen writes:
"Eric saw humans as chemical compounds with an inflated sense of their own worth. 'it's just all nature, chemistry, and math," he wrote. 'you die, burn, melt, evaporate, decay."
This is taken out of context. What Eric actually was writing about was how people were not going to understand why he committed the massacre and why humans shouldn't be bound by laws or morals.
The full quote is this"
"fuck mercy fuck justic fuck morals fuck civilized fuck rules fuck laws... DIE manmade words...people think they apply to everything when they dont/cant. theres no such thing as True Good or True Evil, its all relative to the observer. its just all nature, chemistry, and math. deal with it. but since dealing with it seems impossible for mankind, since we have to slap warning labels on nature, then... you die. burn, melt, evaporate, decay, just go the fuck away!!!! YAAAAAH!!!!"
Cullen has either totally misinterpreted or intentionally misrepresented this thought written by Harris.

Cullen writes the following about what has been determined about psychopaths:
"Psychopaths are distinguished by two characteristics. The first is a ruthless disregard for others: they will defraud, maim, or kill for the most trivial personal gain. The second is an astonishing gift for disguising the first. It's the deception that makes them so dangerous. You never see him coming. Don't look for the oddball creeping you out. Psychopaths don't act like Hannibal Lecter or Norman Bates. They come off like Hugh Grant, in his most adorable role."
"Joy, grief, anxiety, or amusement. He can mimic any one cue. He knows the facial expressions, the voice modulation, and the body language. He's not just conning you with a scheme, he's conning you with his life. His entire personality is a fabrication, with the purpose of deceiving suckers like you."
Now, let's think about Eric Harris-
Very few people actually liked Eric. He had a few friends but contrary to Cullen's claims was not popular or "practically a celebrity".  A lot of people, like Devon, Sasha, the Browns, and kids in school said he was scary, weird, and talked about weird things. No one was really surprised that Eric was involved in the shooting.  If a pyschopath is supposed to fly so under the radar, then why was it not a shock that Eric did what he did?
Second, there are enough videos floating around of Eric from which you can get some idea of his personality. When they're messing up lines in Radioactive Clothing and laughing, when they are joking around at Rampart Range, when you see him looking anxious/uncomfortable in the Eric in Columbine video, or when you read some of the things he wrote. Honestly take a look at that stuff and ask yourself if he is faking his emotional responses. I don't believe for a second that this stuff is mimicry. Watch some of his school vids- the kid is a lousy actor. I'm supposed to believe that he's good at acting in real life but not on video? Something doesn't add up there.

Cullen says "Psychopaths take great personal pride in their deceptions and extract tremendous joy from them. Lies become the psychopath's occupation, and when the truth will work, they lie for sport." He calls this "duper's delight."
I have yet to see one lie that Eric told for sport. He was a liar for sure but he lied about things like being sorry for breaking into the van and wanting to join the Marines. He lied about things to protect himself, not to amuse himself.

Cullen writes,
"Hare created a separate screening device for juveniles and identified hallmarks that appear during the school years: gratuitous lying, indifference to the pain of others, defiance of authority figures, unresponsiveness to reprimands or threatened punishments, petty theft, persistent aggression, cutting classes and breaking curfew, cruelty to animals, early experimentation with sex, and vandalism and setting fires. Eric bragged about nine of the ten hallmarks in his journal and on his website- for most of them, relentlessly. Only animal cruelty is missing."
Not quite.
As mentioned, his lying wasn't gratuitious.
Harris may have talked a big game about not liking being told what to do by authority figures but we all know he that he wasn't mouthing off to teachers, his parents, or his bosses. He did what he was told, he got his school work, chores, and stuff at his jobs done. If he was given a punishment he abided by it to avoid further trouble. Saying he was defiant of authority figures and unresponsive to reprimands or threatened punishments is untrue.
There is absolutely no evidence that Eric cut class. Brooks said Eric rarely missed class and that's why him being out on that last day was so strange, especially because of the test.
Eric also talked a lot about hurting other people but until the end of his life he didn't. In fact, it was just his last few months that he was getting mouthy with or picking fights with people, according to Chris Morris. So calling him persistently aggressive just because he wrote aggressive things is a stretch; he wasn't acting on it for the vast majority of his life.
Eric was a virgin, so that's a lie, too.

So, of these 10 indicators I think Eric fits four of them:
1. indifference to the pain of others
2. petty theft
3. breaking curfew (the "missions")
4. vandalism and setting fires  

Cullen writes, "Psychopaths feel something; Eric seemed to show sadness when his dog was sick, and he occasionally felt twinges of regret towards humans. But the signals come through dimly"
Disagree.
Eric spoke and wrote of how bad he felt for his parents several times, how they were good people and were good to him, he said the same of his brother and he cried over friends in Michigan. These don't seem like twinges to me.

He mentions that "psychopaths develop a handful of primitive emotions closely related to their own welfare. Thre have been identified: anger, frustration, and rage."
This I agree fits with Eric.
He says, "Indignation runs strong in the psychopath. It springs from a staggering ego and sense of superiority."
I agree that indignation was a trait of Eric's. I agree that Eric had an ego and liked to think himself better than other people, but I also see a lot of self-hate in Eric so I question how much of his "I'm a god" stuff was real.

Other traits he says psychopaths possess: thrill seekers, rarely stick with a career because they get bored ("they lack clear goals and objectives", "they make careless mistakes and pass up stunning opportunities")
Cullen says this fits Eric because he had no plans for his future and "He was one of the smartest kids in his high school, but apparently never bothered to apply to college."
I disagree on a few points.
Eric didn't seem like much of a thrill seeker to me. He seemed like a control freak. Everything he did was carefully planned and orchestrated, he left nothing to chance. He was detail-oriented, or as much as a kid his age can be. Only the van break-in was spontaneous and careless. I don't consider the missions thrill seeking because I don't think I know a single teenager who HASN'T done shit like that at some point or another. I know I did and I wasn't a particularly daring kind of kid.
And they started planning NBK probably around April of 1998, when they were juniors. You start applying for colleges in the fall of your senior year. He was by that time several months into planning his own death. When you think of it this way, is it really surprising that he wasn't thinking of college?
Finally, Eric was a bright kid but he was far from being one of the smartest kids at Columbine. Even from the start of high school, he wasn't taking honors or AP classes. He wasn't in any kind of gifted program and didn't participate in any academic clubs, etc. either in high school or middle school, as far as we know. It's clear that Cullen is trying to intimate that Eric had all this wasted potential because he was a psychopath, but from everything we have available it looks like Eric was an above average student at best. He was not valedictorian material because he wasn't smart enough, not because he wasn't motivated enough.

He talks about the relationship between Eric and Dylan as a "dyad, murderous pairs who feed off each other."
Definitely agree with this.
But then he says, "An angry, erratic depressive and a sadistic pschopath make a combustible pair"
I agree Dylan was depressed, angry, and erratic. I also believe there was more there, too. I'm not a psychiatrist but I don't see Dylan as this one-dimensional caricature he's described as. He was a pretty complex person from everything I've read.
I see no evidence that Eric was a sadist (someone who derives pleasure from inflicting pain, suffering, or humiliation on others). He was angry, he hated himself and other people, he wanted to be respected and he wasn't and he wanted people to pay for not giving him that respect. But I don't think he got off on watching other people hurt. Exacting revenge is a whole other animal from taking pleasure in suffering.
And, of course, I don't think he was a psychopath either.

Ya'll need to remember that Eric wrote the journal as
REB which is his persona opossite of the "weird, weak Eric" like he said. He wrote this for the audience.

real Eric was in the basement tapes. Why they didn't they released it we know why. Because we would see the different side of him. Not like cullen, media portrayed him.

Rebbie556 wrote:

Ya'll need to remember that Eric wrote the journal as
REB  which is his persona opossite of the "weird, weak Eric" like he said. He wrote this for the audience.

real Eric was in the basement tapes. Why they didn't they released it we know why.   Because we would see the different side of him. Not like cullen, media portrayed him.

I agree. I feel like his last journal entry was him coming to terms with that he would have to do this "don't let the weird looking Eric kid come"

Towards the end he only referred to himself as Reb, do you remember the boss at Blackjack calling 911 and calling him Reb Harris?

I think it's interesting in RR Dylan called him Reb but in his writings and to his other friends it was always Eric.

Rebbie556 wrote:

Ya'll need to remember that Eric wrote the journal as
REB  which is his persona opossite of the "weird, weak Eric" like he said. He wrote this for the audience.

"You know what. Fuck it. Why should I have to explain myself to you survivors when half of this shit I say you shitheads won’t understand and if you can then woopie fucking do. That just means you have something to say as my reason for killing. And the majority of the audience won’t even understand my motives either! They’ll say 'ah, he’s crazy, he’s insane, worthless!' All you fuckers should die! DIE! What the fuck is the point if only some people see what I am saying, there will always be ones who don’t, ones that are to dumb or naïve or ignorant or just plain retarded. If I can’t pound it into every single persons head then it is pointless."

I will repeat this quote ever single time someone says Eric was writing for an audience. I'm going to end up sounding like a God damned broken record, but fuck, it is really obvious from this passage that Eric isn't writing for an audience. I hate seeing people constantly throw that assertion out there.

QuestionMark wrote:

Rebbie556 wrote:

Ya'll need to remember that Eric wrote the journal as
REB  which is his persona opossite of the "weird, weak Eric" like he said. He wrote this for the audience.

"You know what. Fuck it. Why should I have to explain myself to you survivors when half of this shit I say you shitheads won’t understand and if you can then woopie fucking do. That just means you have something to say as my reason for killing. And the majority of the audience won’t even understand my motives either! They’ll say 'ah, he’s crazy, he’s insane, worthless!' All you fuckers should die! DIE! What the fuck is the point if only some people see what I am saying, there will always be ones who don’t, ones that are to dumb or naïve or ignorant or just plain retarded. If I can’t pound it into every single persons head then it is pointless."

I will repeat this quote ever single time someone says Eric was writing for an audience. I'm going to end up sounding like a God damned broken record, but fuck, it is really obvious from this passage that Eric isn't writing for an audience. I hate seeing people constantly throw that assertion out there.

It will become like your own personal wage gap buzzer that I keep seeing on YouTube.

I don't think I am wrong in saying that the Basement Tapes also probably has many different "scenes" where they lay out exactly why they are doing it.

QuestionMark wrote:

Rebbie556 wrote:

Ya'll need to remember that Eric wrote the journal as
REB  which is his persona opossite of the "weird, weak Eric" like he said. He wrote this for the audience.

"You know what. Fuck it. Why should I have to explain myself to you survivors when half of this shit I say you shitheads won’t understand and if you can then woopie fucking do. That just means you have something to say as my reason for killing. And the majority of the audience won’t even understand my motives either! They’ll say 'ah, he’s crazy, he’s insane, worthless!' All you fuckers should die! DIE! What the fuck is the point if only some people see what I am saying, there will always be ones who don’t, ones that are to dumb or naïve or ignorant or just plain retarded. If I can’t pound it into every single persons head then it is pointless."

I will repeat this quote ever single time someone says Eric was writing for an audience. I'm going to end up sounding like a God damned broken record, but fuck, it is really obvious from this passage that Eric isn't writing for an audience. I hate seeing people constantly throw that assertion out there.

I'm with you that stating it as a fact is annoying, but I don't see that passage as even coming close to refuting the point. If anything, that shows exasperation with his audience, not that he doesn't have one. "You know what. Fuck it. Why should I have to explain myself to you survivors" is something you say after attempting to explain yourself to survivors. As screaming points out, that seems much of the reason for the Basement Tapes. As somebody else pointed out, probably the reason for their t-shirts. All of that, for an audience.

I also see the entry on the day he got the guns as best supporting the contention: "Well folks, today was a very important day in the history of R." Who are the folks? We are, obviously. Also, it does say "R" to support Rebbie's contention.

He left the journal on his bed after the massacre for cops to find it seems. I doubt every entry had an audience in mind - say the experiments, but I also think some did - he even seems to want to show off his drawings to the camera based on what we know of the Basement Tapes.

cakeman wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

Rebbie556 wrote:

Ya'll need to remember that Eric wrote the journal as
REB  which is his persona opossite of the "weird, weak Eric" like he said. He wrote this for the audience.

"You know what. Fuck it. Why should I have to explain myself to you survivors when half of this shit I say you shitheads won’t understand and if you can then woopie fucking do. That just means you have something to say as my reason for killing. And the majority of the audience won’t even understand my motives either! They’ll say 'ah, he’s crazy, he’s insane, worthless!' All you fuckers should die! DIE! What the fuck is the point if only some people see what I am saying, there will always be ones who don’t, ones that are to dumb or naïve or ignorant or just plain retarded. If I can’t pound it into every single persons head then it is pointless."

I will repeat this quote ever single time someone says Eric was writing for an audience. I'm going to end up sounding like a God damned broken record, but fuck, it is really obvious from this passage that Eric isn't writing for an audience. I hate seeing people constantly throw that assertion out there.

I'm with you that stating it as a fact is annoying, but I don't see that passage as even coming close to refuting the point. If anything, that shows exasperation with his audience, not that he doesn't have one. "You know what. Fuck it. Why should I have to explain myself to you survivors" is something you say after attempting to explain yourself to survivors. As screaming points out, that seems much of the reason for the Basement Tapes. As somebody else pointed out, probably the reason for their t-shirts. All of that, for an audience.

I also see the entry on the day he got the guns as best supporting the contention: "Well folks, today was a very important day in the history of R." Who are the folks? We are, obviously. Also, it does say "R" to support Rebbie's contention.

He left the journal on his bed after the massacre for cops to find it seems. I doubt every entry had an audience in mind - say the experiments, but I also think some did - he even seems to want to show off his drawings to the camera based on what we know of the Basement Tapes.

The thing is that when I hear people say "Eric was writing for an audience" what I'm hearing is "Eric was just posturing, he didn't mean what he wrote down", and to me that just reeks. When Eric was pouring himself out on his pages, I assume he was telling the truth. He talks about being shy around women, how he hates his own looks, about how people picked on or rejected him, so I assume that when he sticks statements in-between that like how he wants to kill mentally challenged people or torture a freshman, he's being honest to his audience about who he is and what he's feeling.

I dunno, maybe he just lied to look cooler, but his actions on 4/20 suggest otherwise to me.

QuestionMark wrote:

The thing is that when I hear people say "Eric was writing for an audience" what I'm hearing is "Eric was just posturing, he didn't mean what he wrote down", and to me that just reeks. When Eric was pouring himself out on his pages, I assume he was telling the truth. He talks about being shy around women, how he hates his own looks, about how people picked on or rejected him, so I assume that when he sticks statements in-between that like how he wants to kill mentally challenged people or torture a freshman, he's being honest to his audience about who he is and what he's feeling.

I dunno, maybe he just lied to look cooler, but his actions on 4/20 suggest otherwise to me.

I agree with this, with a clarification. I do believe the journal writings were representative of Eric's feelings. It can't be interpretated both ways- i.e., you can't say that when he wrote of killing mankind he was being Reb but when he wrote of people making fun of him he was Eric. That's like Cullen picking out only those things that support his point and finding excuses to dismiss other things that weaken it.
I do believe there were parts of his journal that seemed over the top even for Eric and maybe there is some posturing in that, but Eric hated people, he hated life, he killed and severely maimed people which is about as good evidence as any that his words were real.
However, I do think that he wrote for an audience but when I say it it's because he would specifically say things like "why should I have to explain myself to you survivors", "I know what all you fuckers are thinking and what to do to piss you off and make you feel bad", "  someones bound to say "what were they thinking?" when we go NBK or when we were planning it, so this what I am thinking" "I hate you people for leaving me out of so many fun things." He was, quite literally, addressing an audience because he knew after they did this thing people were going to be trying to figure out why and he wanted his ideas, thoughts, and feelings known. I think that's why he started the journal in the first place since the beginning of it seems to coincide with when they decided they were going NBK.
I think like every angry, confused, self- hating, probably mentally ill person, some of what Eric wrote was for shock value, some was for sympathy (although I think he tried to keep that to a minimum because he didn't want to appear weak), and some was brutally honest.

QuestionMark wrote:

cakeman wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

Rebbie556 wrote:

Ya'll need to remember that Eric wrote the journal as
REB  which is his persona opossite of the "weird, weak Eric" like he said. He wrote this for the audience.

"You know what. Fuck it. Why should I have to explain myself to you survivors when half of this shit I say you shitheads won’t understand and if you can then woopie fucking do. That just means you have something to say as my reason for killing. And the majority of the audience won’t even understand my motives either! They’ll say 'ah, he’s crazy, he’s insane, worthless!' All you fuckers should die! DIE! What the fuck is the point if only some people see what I am saying, there will always be ones who don’t, ones that are to dumb or naïve or ignorant or just plain retarded. If I can’t pound it into every single persons head then it is pointless."

I will repeat this quote ever single time someone says Eric was writing for an audience. I'm going to end up sounding like a God damned broken record, but fuck, it is really obvious from this passage that Eric isn't writing for an audience. I hate seeing people constantly throw that assertion out there.

I'm with you that stating it as a fact is annoying, but I don't see that passage as even coming close to refuting the point. If anything, that shows exasperation with his audience, not that he doesn't have one. "You know what. Fuck it. Why should I have to explain myself to you survivors" is something you say after attempting to explain yourself to survivors. As screaming points out, that seems much of the reason for the Basement Tapes. As somebody else pointed out, probably the reason for their t-shirts. All of that, for an audience.

I also see the entry on the day he got the guns as best supporting the contention: "Well folks, today was a very important day in the history of R." Who are the folks? We are, obviously. Also, it does say "R" to support Rebbie's contention.

He left the journal on his bed after the massacre for cops to find it seems. I doubt every entry had an audience in mind - say the experiments, but I also think some did - he even seems to want to show off his drawings to the camera based on what we know of the Basement Tapes.

The thing is that when I hear people say "Eric was writing for an audience" what I'm hearing is "Eric was just posturing, he didn't mean what he wrote down", and to me that just reeks. When Eric was pouring himself out on his pages, I assume he was telling the truth. He talks about being shy around women, how he hates his own looks, about how people picked on or rejected him, so I assume that when he sticks statements in-between that like how he wants to kill mentally challenged people or torture a freshman, he's being honest to his audience about who he is and what he's feeling.

I dunno, maybe he just lied to look cooler, but his actions on 4/20 suggest otherwise to me.

On that I agree. "He knew he was writing for an audience, therefore he was just posturing" doesn't seem to follow, and it is quite annoying to see people state with confidence. It should warrant some skepticism "remember, he knew this would be read one day, he might not be completely truthful", but not establish that he wasn't truthful. It takes more to argue that claim. I would agree, however, that the majority of his writing leading up to the massacre is addressing future readers like us, not himself or nobody in particular.

And I think the journals, then the basement tapes, and then the shirts establish some of what you wanted to establish by using that quote of his. He was trying in earnest to explain himself and struggling, and so tried three different methods.

thelmar wrote:

I think like every angry, confused, self- hating, probably mentally ill person, some of what Eric wrote was for shock value, some was for sympathy (although I think he tried to keep that to a minimum because he didn't want to appear weak), and some was brutally honest.

cakeman wrote:

"He knew he was writing for an audience, therefore he was just posturing" doesn't seem to follow, and it is quite annoying to see people state with confidence. It should warrant some skepticism "remember, he knew this would be read one day, he might not be completely truthful", but not establish that he wasn't truthful. It takes more to argue that claim. I would agree, however, that the majority of his writing leading up to the massacre is addressing future readers like us, not himself or nobody in particular.

And I think the journals, then the basement tapes, and then the shirts establish some of what you wanted to establish by using that quote of his. He was trying in earnest to explain himself and struggling, and so tried three different methods.

On this, I can agree. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] I'll add to your statement by saying that some of Eric's statements might've also been attempts at humor as well, like when he talks about how people who can't hold a lighter the right way deserved to be shot.

Sorry it's taken so long to get back to this; but dealing with some stuff.

Chapter 41-
Nothing really stands out to me as out there; though I don't have a lot of knowledge of the lawsuits and things to know how accurate the information he presented is.
Discussed in this chapter:
-Fuselier presented his case of Eric as psychopath at a school shooter summit in Va and that a bunch of attending psychologists agreed with him.
-Jeffco covering their tracks (the missing Guerra files).
-Some of the healing of Ireland, Hochhalter, Graves, and Kirklin.
-The decision to get rid of the library and kids wanting to go back to Columbine.
-The lawsuits. The donations that the victims and families of the deceased fought over.
- The letters the Harrises and Klebold's sent to the victims and their families.

Chapter 42-
Cullen writes "Eric was an injustice collector"
He TOTALLY ripped that from Judy Brown. I have tried in vain to find the video in which she said this but so many of them have been removed from YouTube. I am 100% certain that it was from an interview in 1999 in the months after the massacre. She discussed the snowball incident and how he got real angry and beat on her car. And then she talked about how he never let things go and she called him an injustice collector. I remember it because I thought it was such a good phrase.
If I can find the video I'll post the link here.

Cullen goes on for 3 paragraphs about how in the year before the killings Eric was writing down all his plans on his website, journal, in Dylan's yearbook, in other people's year books. "This is just the kind of move that delighted Eric: warn the world, in writing, to show us how stupid we all are."
And then even though Dylan was doing the exact same thing, all Cullen writes is that in Eric's yearbook Dylan wrote "page after page of specific murder plans."
SMDH.

And as proof that they weren't bullied, he writes "Despite the press's obsession with bullying and misfits, that's not how the boys presented themselves. Dylan laughed about picking on the new freshman and 'fags.' Neither one complained about bullies picking on them- they boasted about doing it themselves."
Let's just ignore all of the friends and acquaintances who SAID they were bullied. Let's just ignore Dylan's mention of "our revenge in the commons". Let's just ignore the fact that NO ONE is actually going to be filling pages of a friend's yearbook with their tales of all the times they were picked on!

He writes "NBK was nothing but a diversion to Dylan- fantasy chats with his buddy about what they would like to do. Dylan didn't believe it; he didn't plan to go through with it. All he knew was that he was a felon now. His miserable life had grown pathetically worse."
Utter garbage. He can't know how much Dylan believed or disbelieved, how invested or univested he was. Dylan built bombs with Eric. Dylan bought guns with Robyn. Dylan bought a gun from Manes BY HIMSELF. Dylan spent the money he earned on supplies for NBK. How in the hell can Cullen claim he was doing nothing?

There's more stuff about how Eric following the Diversion rules to the letter and convincing everyone he was on the straight and narrow is proof he was a psychopath.
Or, maybe it's just proof that he knew what he needed to do to get out of the program.
He uses as an example that Eric's Diversion counselor told him he needed to manage his time better. Apparently "Eric could be a procrastinator- a common affliction among psychopaths."
Cullen writes that Eric went out and bought a Rebel planner, filled a week in, then showed it to her and "gushed" that it was really helping him and after that he quit using it to manage his time and instead "used the book to vent his real feelings."
Another half-truth. He did alter the headings in his twisted ways, but, he kept writing down his assignments and appointments, too. It's all there in the Columbine Documents, kinda hard to miss.
Also, where is he getting that Eric was a procrastinator? He strikes me as highly anal retentive and someone who planned things to the letter.

And this gem:
"And why wouldn't Andrea Sanchez like Eric more? Everyone did. He was funny and clever, and that smile, man- he knew just when to flash it, too; just how long to hang back, tease you with it, make you work for it, and then lay it on."
I'm sorry but what in the actual f--k is that? Just, where in his ass is he pulling this from? Dylan was far better liked than Eric. Far better. Ask literally anyone.

Cullen implies that Eric may not have needed to change to from Zoloft to Luvox, and only did it because it was actually fixing him and he didn't want to be fixed. "He might have actually complained about the Zoloft because it was working too effective."
Another bombshell statement with squat for evidence to back it up.

He writes that Eric had trouble snowing his dad like he did everyone else and uses pg. 25946 of the Columbine Documents as his proof. (It's the page where he writes "Unwilling to control study habits. Unmotivated to succeed in school", etc.)
My question is this- The page BEFORE this (pg. 25945) says "Kevin Harris"
So how do we know this list wasn't in reference to Kevin? Eric's grades were decent; he wasn't brilliant like Cullen wants people to think but he was getting good marks and his assignments were always turned in on time. I don't think this page applied to Eric.  

Cullen writes "And Dylan had a big surprise. He had no intention of inflicting Eric's massacre. He enjoyed the banter, but privately said good-bye. He expected his August 10 entry to be his last. Dylan was planning to kill himself long before NBK."
The pages he's referencing are pg. 26412- 26413. Dylan mentions killing himself for the umpteenth time but for some reason Cullen expects us to believe that this is the one where he really meant it and he was never really going to do NBK.  

Cullen claims that the videos the two made were "Eric guiding his unsteady partner: fantasy to reality, one step at a time. Dylan ate it up."
And again  

There's more stuff about Eric's class assignments and how they show what a psychopath he was; it's kind of beating a dead horse at this point so I won't belabor it but he includes, at length, the Nazi paper and then how Eric must have realized he was showing too much of himself so then he went the other way and got all contrite with other stuff he wrote.
And he again dismisses one of Eric's heartfelt writings, where he says he would have been a great marine and it would have given him a reason to be good. He said Fuselier said "Even extreme psychopaths show flickers of empathy now and then."
SMDH.

thelmar wrote:

Very few people actually liked Eric. He had a few friends but contrary to Cullen's claims was not popular or "practically a celebrity".  

There are tons of people who have stated that Eric was a nice person. It's common knowledge that irritability is a symptom of antisocial personality disorder.

thelmar wrote:

Devon A lot of people, like Devon, Sasha, the Browns, and kids in school said he was scary, weird, and talked about weird things. No one was really surprised that Eric was involved in the shooting.  If a pyschopath is supposed to fly so under the radar, then why was it not a shock that Eric did what he did?

Have you ever heard of serial killer and child pedophile Alfred Fish? I suggest you look him up. He often penned sexually explicit, graphic letters to women. Fish never flew under the radar like Ted Bundy, but his sadistic urges and delight in deceiving, and then later murdering, young children make him a psychopath.  

thelmar wrote:

Second, there are enough videos floating around of Eric from which you can get some idea of his personality. When they're messing up lines in Radioactive Clothing and laughing, when they are joking around at Rampart Range, when you see him looking anxious/uncomfortable in the Eric in Columbine video, or when you read some of the things he wrote. Honestly take a look at that stuff and ask yourself if he is faking his emotional responses.

Why would Eric need to fake his emotional responses around his friends? What was there for him to gain?

thelmar wrote:

I don't believe for a second that this stuff is mimicry.

Neither do I.

thelmar wrote:

I have yet to see one lie that Eric told for sport. He was a liar for sure but he lied about things like being sorry for breaking into the van and wanting to join the Marines. He lied about things to protect himself, not to amuse himself.

Harris: "I could convince them that I’m going to climb Mount Everest, or I have a twin
brother growing out of my back. I can make you believe anything."--Basement Tapes

thelmar wrote:

There is absolutely no evidence that Eric cut class. Brooks said Eric rarely missed class and that's why him being out on that last day was so strange, especially because of the test.
Eric also talked a lot about hurting other people but until the end of his life he didn't.

He seems"other-oriented" perfectionist; you know, one who is often disparaging and judgmental of people who fail to meet their standards, e.g., Dylan, Brooks Brown, Mark Manes, etc.

thelmar wrote:

So calling him persistently aggressive just because he wrote aggressive things is a stretch; he wasn't acting on it for the vast majority of his life.

There's not a lot of information out there about Eric's childhood and preadolescence years, other than what's already publicly available online and in newspaper archives. From what I gather, he had a normal childhood punctuated by tragedy (his physical deformities) and occasional odd-ball behavior (playing with matches and fire at an early age). Other than that,  I'm not qualified to say he was aggressive his entire life, and neither are most forum members, who are strangers to the Harrises. There's just so little evidence.

thelmar wrote:

Cullen writes, "Psychopaths feel something; Eric seemed to show sadness when his dog was sick, and he occasionally felt twinges of regret towards humans. But the signals come through dimly"
Disagree.
Eric spoke and wrote of how bad he felt for his parents several times, how they were good people and were good to him, he said the same of his brother and he cried over friends in Michigan. These don't seem like twinges to me.

If Eric felt so sorry for what he's about to do, he wouldn't have done it. The guilt and shame would have overwhelmed him, as it would most normal teens. This shows poor impulse control and an inability to prioritize his future. In fact, he only had weeks to go until graduation.

thelmar wrote:

He mentions that "psychopaths develop a handful of primitive emotions closely related to their own welfare. Thre have been identified: anger, frustration, and rage."
This I agree fits with Eric.

I am glad you agree.

thelmar wrote:

You start applying for colleges in the fall of your senior year. He was by that time several months into planning his own death. When you think of it this way, is it really surprising that he wasn't thinking of college?

Has anyone ever doubted that Eric/Dylan thought they would die by police fire?

jada887 wrote:

There are tons of people who have stated that Eric was a nice person. It's common knowledge that irritability is a symptom of antisocial personality disorder.

There are definitely people who liked Eric, but there are more that reported thinking he was weird, angry, and scary. My point is, that Cullen is implying that everybody liked Eric, that he was popular. That just isn't the case.

jada887 wrote:

Have you ever heard of serial killer and child pedophile Alfred Fish? I suggest you look him up. He often penned sexually explicit, graphic letters to women. Fish never flew under the radar like Ted Bundy, but his sadistic urges and delight in deceiving, and then later murdering, young children make him a psychopath.

Yes, I'm quite familiar with Fish; he's equal parts fascinating and disgusting. My point about Eric is that absolutely no one (save maybe his parents but we don't really know) was surprised that Eric was capable of something violent. Countless times throughout the police reports people state they were shocked that Dylan did something like this but they were not surprised with Eric's involvement. If he was supposed to be so good at hiding his evil/violent side, fitting in and not bringing attention to this part of himself, how come everyone knew he had the potential to be violent?

jada887 wrote:

Why would Eric need to fake his emotional responses around his friends? What was there for him to gain?

If you subscribe to Fuselier's (and by extension, Cullen's) description of a psychopath, all emotional responses by a psychopath are faked. They mimic the responses of others to get along, to not stand out. They feel emotions only shallowly, if at all. They are incapable of having any real depth of feeling, even for family members and friends. So, for a psychopath to be yukking it up with his friends, he'd have to be faking, according to Fuselier and Cullen. My point is, I don't believe this based upon what I see in those videos.

jada887 wrote:

"I could convince them that I’m going to climb Mount Everest, or I have a twin
brother growing out of my back. I can make you believe anything."[/i]--Basement Tapes

But he didn't tell those kinds of lies, did he? He lied to his parents about not having alcohol in his room. He lied about feeling bad that he broke into the van. His lies had a self-serving purpose, they weren't for fun. Yes, he prided himself on being able to lie himself out of these situations, but he wasn't lying for sport.  

jada887 wrote:

He seems"other-oriented" perfectionist; you know, one who is often disparaging and judgmental of people who fail to meet their standards, e.g., Dylan, Brooks Brown, Mark Manes, etc.

Agreed.  

jada887 wrote:

There's not a lot of information out there about Eric's childhood and preadolescence years, other than what's already publicly available online and in newspaper archives. From what I gather, he had a normal childhood punctuated by tragedy (his physical deformities) and occasional odd-ball behavior (playing with matches and fire at an early age). Other than that,  I'm not qualified to say he was aggressive his entire life, and neither are most forum members, who are strangers to the Harrises. There's just so little evidence.

Agreed. There's no evidence that, other than writing aggressive things, that he was overtly aggressive until the last year of his life. Certainly people thought he had the potential for violence but he wasn't actually committing violent or aggressive acts until that last year. Cullen implying so is misleading because there is nothing to back that up.  

jada887 wrote:

If Eric felt so sorry for what he's about to do, he wouldn't have done it. The guilt and shame would have overwhelmed him, as it would most normal teens. This shows poor impulse control and an inability to prioritize his future. In fact, he only had weeks to go until graduation.

Lots of people do things they feel guilt and shame about. Drug addicts, theives, spousal abusers, child abusers, etc... Just because these people don't stop themselves does not mean they are all psychopaths. Poor impulse control can occur from other mental health conditions. But Eric subdued his "impulses" for a year while he was planning NBK. He hid everything he was doing from everyone who knew him. He didn't just fly off the handle and start mowing people down. I think that indicates a fairly good level of control.

jada887 wrote:

Has anyone ever doubted that Eric/Dylan thought they would die by police fire?

I don't think they cared if it was suicide by cop or they did it themselves. Killing themselves was always an option for them, as well. So much so that they included it as one of the hand signals that they would give to each other if the need arose (finger gun to the head).

thelmar wrote:

jada887 wrote:

Has anyone ever doubted that Eric/Dylan thought they would die by police fire?

I don't think they cared if it was suicide by cop or they did it themselves. Killing themselves was always an option for them, as well. So much so that they included it as one of the hand signals that they would give to each other if the need arose (finger gun to the head).

Nobody doubts they wanted to kill cops/die by cop until I say they didn't roam the halls because they were sad and full of regret or because they wanted extra revenge on the school by shooting lockers, but because they were looking for cops, and it's silly to think they didn't think cops were in the building just because we know they weren't.  

I kid, but barely.

By the fact that they committed suicide and that they had a hand signal for it, suicide was definitely an option. I wouldn't go so far as to say it shows they didn't care one way or the other. I think they definitely preferred if someone or something else did it for them. Aside from the apparent allusions to death by cop, I would point to Dylan's (and apparently Eric's as well) reluctance to commit suicide pre-massacre and their trying to make the bombs explode on the CCTV when they would have died had they succeeded.

thelmar wrote:

There are definitely people who liked Eric, but there are more that reported thinking he was weird, angry, and scary. My point is, that Cullen is implying that everybody liked Eric, that he was popular. That just isn't the case.

You stated that very few people liked Eric. That's not true. There were plenty of people who knew and liked Eric, including Brooks Brown (most of the time). Eric's provocative behavior isn't unusual for people with antisocial tendencies.

thelmar wrote:

If he was supposed to be so good at hiding his evil/violent side, fitting in and not bringing attention to this part of himself, how come everyone knew he had the potential to be violent?

No, that's not quite true for psychopaths. Dave Cullen is wrong on this point; there are psychopaths who do not fly under the radar and are known threats to both law enforcement, the general public, and close family members and friends. Alfred Fish and Henry Lee Lucas are two prominent examples that come to mind. It isn't shocking knowledge that everyone knew Eric was the culprit. I am more surprised that everyone was shocked by Dylan's participation. Eric and Dylan did everything together, even break into a van and commit juvenile misdemeanors. Is it any wonder that Dylan would join in?

thelmar wrote:

If you subscribe to Fuselier's (and by extension, Cullen's) description of a psychopath, all emotional responses by a psychopath are faked. They mimic the responses of others to get along, to not stand out. They feel emotions only shallowly, if at all. They are incapable of having any real depth of feeling, even for family members and friends. So, for a psychopath to be yukking it up with his friends, he'd have to be faking, according to Fuselier and Cullen. My point is, I don't believe this based upon what I see in those videos.

That is not true. Psychopaths on the lower-side of the checklist (below 40, but above 30) are capable of genuine emotion. They can laugh, love and cry like everyone, and may even feel remorse, but those feelings are fleeting (as you ironically point out). There is no evidence that Eric had strong, meaningful friendships or lasting romantic courtships. According to Kass, he had on again and off again friendships with everyone that knew him, except for Dylan. He was bitter at parties and not a fun drinker, like Dylan. He sounds like a pain in the ass, which according to Devon Adams, he was for much of his life. Again, not unusual, antisocial behavior.

thelmar wrote:

Agreed. There's no evidence that, other than writing aggressive things, that he was overtly aggressive until the last year of his life. Certainly people thought he had the potential for violence but he wasn't actually committing violent or aggressive acts until that last year. Cullen implying so is misleading because there is nothing to back that up.  

Again, there's no evidence either way. He had the potential for violence, and that's why I have a hard to time believing that this behavior came out of the blue. Psychopathy usually manifests itself in early childhood. All I know about Eric's early life is the one interview I conducted with his childhood friend in New York, who stated that Eric already had a preoccupation with fire and destruction. He almost burned his own house down, but his friend thinks it was an accident (although he said he wasn't sure). I regret I didn't press him on this point (I had to finish my college thesis and ran out of time), but other than that, I don't know. There's so little available evidence. That doesn't mean it wasn't there. There's just not much to analyze.

thelmar wrote:

Lots of people do things they feel guilt and shame about. Drug addicts, theives, spousal abusers, child abusers, etc... Just because these people don't stop themselves does not mean they are all psychopaths.

They may feel guilty about what they are doing, but they cannot control their impulses, which are stronger than their consciences.

thelmar wrote:

Poor impulse control can occur from other mental health conditions. But Eric subdued his "impulses" for a year while he was planning NBK. He hid everything he was doing from everyone who knew him. He didn't just fly off the handle and start mowing people down. I think that indicates a fairly good level of control.

No. It indicates that he had a very narrow time horizon. It indicates that he had preoccupation with his fantasies and was unable to focus his attention on other things, like his future. And yes, I agree. Impulsiveness is a symptom in other mental health disorders. Borderline personality disorder is one of them. However, Dr. Albert has never published his findings or agreed to an interview, so we don't know what he thought of Eric's behavior.[/quote]

jada887 wrote:

You stated that very few people liked Eric. That's not true. There were plenty of people who knew and liked Eric, including Brooks Brown (most of the time). Eric's provocative behavior isn't unusual for people with antisocial tendencies.

You're right, this was a poor choice of words on my part. What I meant to convey was not that no one liked Eric but that he wasn't this widely popular guy, and that he was even actively disliked/ not trusted by some people who knew him in more than just a passing way.

jada887 wrote:

No, that's not quite true for psychopaths. Dave Cullen is wrong on this point; there are psychopaths who do not fly under the radar and are known threats to both law enforcement, the general public, and close family members and friends. Alfred Fish and Henry Lee Lucas are two prominent examples that come to mind. It isn't shocking knowledge that everyone knew Eric was the culprit. I am more surprised that everyone was shocked by Dylan's participation. Eric and Dylan did everything together, even break into a van and commit juvenile misdemeanors. Is it any wonder that Dylan would join in?

jada887 wrote:

That is not true. Psychopaths on the lower-side of the checklist (below 40, but above 30) are capable of genuine emotion. They can laugh, love and cry like everyone, and may even feel remorse, but those feelings are fleeting (as you ironically point out). There is no evidence that Eric had strong, meaningful friendships or lasting romantic courtships. According to Kass, he had on again and off again friendships with everyone that knew him, except for Dylan. He was bitter at parties and not a fun drinker, like Dylan. He sounds like a pain in the ass, which according to Devon Adams, he was for much of his life. Again, not unusual, antisocial behavior.

In defense of Cullen (did I just say that?!), I believe that the majority of things he writes about psychopathy he is just regurgitating from what he heard from Dwayne Fuselier. And while I know little about psychology, in the reading I've done about psychopathy for this and other cases, I believe that Fuselier has a much looser interpretation of what constitutes a psychopath than a lot of other mental health professionals. So instead of saying Cullen says this or that, I probably should be saying Fuselier told Cullen this or that.

jada887 wrote:

No. It indicates that he had a very narrow time horizon. It indicates that he had preoccupation with his fantasies and was unable to focus his attention on other things, like his future. And yes, I agree. Impulsiveness is a symptom in other mental health disorders. Borderline personality disorder is one of them. However, Dr. Albert has never published his findings or agreed to an interview, so we don't know what he thought of Eric's behavior.

I'd like to hear more of your opinion on this. I don't see the planning of NBK as interfering with Eric's ability to focus on other things. Just that thinking of other things was no longer necessary. I feel that for both Eric and Dylan, once they were more seriously into developing their plan, they had effectively decided that they would be committing suicide. Planning for the future wasn't needed because there would be no future. They put up appearances as though life would continue after Columbine, but for the most part they knew that there wouldn't be. I think along the way both of them probably could have been talked down from their plan, probably Dylan more than Eric. I'm interested in your view that the NBK planning itself was in some way a manifestation of Eric's mental health condition.
And as for Dr. Albert, his refusal to provide the Harrises with Eric's medical records will always make me wonder if he is hiding some negligence on his own.

Chapter 43-
In this chapter he writes of Linda and Dave Sanders plan to retire in 2- 3 yrs and move to Wyoming where Dave would work for the U of W.
Patrick Ireland forgave E & D right away so that he could focus on his healing and not be consumed with anger.
Part of helping the students reclaim the school when they returned in August 1999, administrators made the media the scapegoat, something everyone could focus their anger on, and that was the reason for the wall of parents blocking view of students entering the school.
I don't have any information on what is accurate for any of these things.

Chapter 44-
He talks about how Eric built his arsenal and Eric built bombs for NBK. He neglects to mention Dylan was doing the same during that time and was likely there at Eric's house building those things with him. But because Eric took the notes, Cullen implies that Eric built all the bombs.

Cullen quotes when Eric said that if they should get caught prior to NBK "we start killing then and there. I aint going out without a fight." He again uses one of Eric's class assignments (his Medea quote, pg. 26647- 26648) to try to prove that Eric was sending the message that he also wouldn't go down without a fight. Read the Medea paper; it's a stretch IMO.

Cullen writes that Fuselier, from reading Eric's journals, determined that to Eric "humans meant nothing. Eric was superior and determined to prove it. Watching us suffer would be enjoyable." "In a perfect world, Eric would extinguish the species."
I stand by previous comments I've made that I think this is a misinterpretation. Eric hated people, he wanted to kill mankind and he wrote about how he was better than everybody. But if you look through everything he wrote, look at the way he carried himself in videos, listen to what reporters who saw the Basement Tapes say about BOTH E & D hating themselves, I think Eric's "superiority" was his way of dealing with his anger at feeling inferior. He wanted to be looked up to, he wanted to be respected and he wasn't. He talks about people thinking they are higher than him and everyone else just because they were born into money (pg. 26005), about people who get away with wronging other people but not him because he won't allow it (pg. 26007), people making fun of him for how he looks, for being weak; making fun of people who look like him to rip on himself (pg. 26014), people making fun of him whatever he does (pg. 26015), hating people for leaving him out of so many things (pg. 26018). I think all the "we are gods" bullshit that E & D threw around was just a way to pump each other up, to give themselves a reason why they didn't fit in. It's not because we're inferior, it's because we're better and people don't understand that. It always fascinates me that Dylan also wrote extensively of his godlike status, how he existed so far above the "brainless zombies" but because he paired it with all his self hate he gets a pass and Eric doesn't.

Cullen says that Fuselier believes that the only thing that Eric got out of the anger management class he took was how to mask his signs of anger. In his paper, Eric wrote about the triggers that served as warning signs for anger- quick breathing, tunnel vision, tightened muscles, and clenched teeth. "Clarifying tiny giveaways where an expert might see through his act- that kind of data was invaluable. Eric descibed himself as a sponge, and mimicry of agreeable behavior was his number one skill."
There is absolutely no evidence that this is true. He wrote about things presented in the class, as one would be expected to do. For Fuselier to say that Eric started masking his signs of anger based on this class is absurd; there is no possible earthly way for him to know that. And that last sentence, makes it seem like it was Eric who was saying he was a sponge and mimicking agreeable behavior to pass unnoticed, which of course isn't the case either.

Chapter 45-
A lot is covered but not much of it is in extensive detail. This is just some highlights:
He talks about how the 6 month anniversary was tough on students, etc.
He talks about Eric Veik's arrest but doesn't name him. He says that in Veik's diary he wrote that he was sorry he didn't help E & D with their problems, and he wrote of suicide. I assume this is true.
He talks of Carla Hochhalter's suicide. This is borrowed heavily from a Rocky Mountain News article (April 20, 2004 by Lynn Bartels) so I assume most of it is accurate.
He talks of the Klebold's suing Jeffco for not alerting them to the claims about Eric in 1998.
He writes of Mark Manes sentencing and She Said Yes coming out. How Emily Wyant spoke out saying Cassie never said anything and the backlash from that. He wrote of Columbine football winning the state championship in 1999.

thelmar wrote:

In defense of Cullen (did I just say that?!), I believe that the majority of things he writes about psychopathy he is just regurgitating from what he heard from Dwayne Fuselier. And while I know little about psychology, in the reading I've done about psychopathy for this and other cases, I believe that Fuselier has a much looser interpretation of what constitutes a psychopath than a lot of other mental health professionals. So instead of saying Cullen says this or that, I probably should be saying Fuselier told Cullen this or that.

I agree. But I agree because psychopathy is a difficult condition to detect, even when you are a trained professional. But, one of the interesting things about psychopathy, and psychopathic individuals is that they have the ability to split themselves in half, so to speak. Like you mentioned before, psychopaths have genuine, strong emotions for family members, close friends, etc. However they are able, unlike the rest of us, to unplug those emotions when they are committing a crime. It's not unusal for psychopaths to score low on agreeableness and conscientiousness. But because psychopathy is so difficult to detect, it often goes undiagnosed until the perpetrator commits a crime (many psychopaths don't have a crime record).

Also, I'd like to mention that exceptions of perfectionism in others is associated with psychopathic traits.

thelmar wrote:

I'm interested in your view that the NBK planning itself was in some way a manifestation of Eric's mental health condition.
And as for Dr. Albert, his refusal to provide the Harrises with Eric's medical records will always make me wonder if he is hiding some negligence on his own.

I don't think it's unreasonable to assume Dr. Albert thought he had OCD. Usually people with OCD have racing, compulsive thoughts that interfere with daily functioning. Also, I think Eric might not have wanted his parents to hear what he told Dr. Albert. Even so, I think it was Dr. Albert's duty to inform the parents, given that Eric was a minor at the time.

Didn't he state that several people who be harmed if he spoke to the public about Eric? I can't remember.

Chapter 46-
Cullen writes of getting the guns at the gun show with Robyn’s assistance. He couldn’t help throwing in that Eric and Dylan had tried to buy them on their own the day before but because they weren’t 18, “Eric’s charm was not getting them over this hurdle.”

He writes of 10 subtypes of psychopaths, only two of which are prone to brutality and murder- the malevolent psychopath and the tyrannical psychopath. Cullen claims that these two are “driven less by a greed for material gain than by desire for his own aggrandizement and the brutal punishment of inferiors.” He said Eric had characteristics of both.
According to [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Quote :

8. The Malevolent Psychopath-
Especially vindictive and hostile, this subtype displays hateful behavior and is destructively defiant of society. The cold-blooded ruthlessness of the malevolent psychopath is a result of anticipating betrayal and punishment. Others’ emotions are rejected due to a deep, underlying suspicion that any effort at goodwill is merely a ploy to deceive them. Fearless and guiltless, this subtype displays characteristics of the sadistic and paranoid personality disorder. Many murderers and serial killers fit this psychopathic pattern. They appear to feel minimal guilt for their violence, displaying instead arrogant contempt for the rights of others. Nevertheless, while they appear incapable of feeling guilt, they do know the difference between right and wrong. Interestingly, and unlike other variants of psychopathy, “they do not lose self-conscious awareness of their actions, and press forward only if their goals of retribution and destructiveness are likely to be achieved: (Millon and Davis, 1998, p.169).

9. The Tyrannical Psychopath
This subtype, along with the malevolent psychopath, is among the most frightening and cruel of these variants. Although both relate to others by attack, intimidation, and both are destructive, the tyrannical subtype is often stimulated by resistance or weakness. This encourages attack rather than slowing it down. They seem to obtain a very peculiar sense of satisfaction from being unmerciful and inhumane, from creating suffering and seeing its effect on others, and from forcing victims to cower and submit. While they are the purest type of classical psychopath, they exhibit both the sadistic and negativistic personality disorders. Calculatingly cool, they instinctively know how to choose their victims for their submissiveness. They are violent in order to inspire terror and intimidation. They are driven by their fear that others may recognize their inner insecurities and low sense of self-esteem

The first doesn't sound like Harris to me. The second does a bit, in my opinion, with regard to not wanting people to recognize insecurities and poor self esteem and wanting to inspire fear and intimidate others.

He mentions Eric continuing to pester Brenda Parker even after she dumped him; she said he was really bummed out the last time she saw him. Of course, this is all a lie.
He also says Eric was trying to bed Kristi Epling (or “another chick”, as he also refers to her). “Eric turned on the charm, and Kristi went for it- just not enough. It was sex he really wanted; he had no interest in a real relationship, and maybe Kristi picked up on that.” Another example of Cullen’s amazing ability to be in two different people’s heads.

Cullen claims that Dylan’s journal entries during this time (January 1999) show he was hardly doing any work for NBK and was not committed to the plan. First, there are lots of papers in Dylan’s own hand which illustrate that he was, indeed, participating. In fact, it was in January 1999 that Dylan made the arrangements himself with Manes to get the TEC-9. Just because these plans were not included in with his thoughts and feelings writings doesn’t negate that they exist.

Chapter 47-
The Rohrbough’s and Fleming’s sued Jeffco to get the report on the case because despite promises that it would be finished, it still hadn’t been released as of April 10, 2000. According to Cullen, the statute of limitations for the report would have been April 20, 2000. The judge ruled in Rohrbough’s favor and the first batch of evidence was released.

Angela Sanders sued Jeffco for the delays in getting to Dave; other families also sued. A few days after the first anniversary, the judge released the fire department video of the library. Apparently, Jeffco had claimed this was a “training video” which really upset the families because clearly it just documented the scene. In May 2000, the judge also released the 911 tapes and the ballistics reports. He’d read the reports and when he was done, he’d release them if he thought they were pertinent. The Klebold’s and Harris’s filed suit to prevent material taken from their homes (which included the Basement Tapes) from being released. Jeffco finally released their Timeline but continued to lie about what they knew of Eric’s threats and pipe bombs.

Cullen claims that members of the community began to get angry at the families for “milking” the tragedy. He also writes about the renewed gun debates, legislation and Tom Mauser’s gun control activism.

He mentions Patrick Ireland becoming valedictorian of the class of 2000.
I know little about the lawsuits but have read some and this seems consistent with what I know.

Chapter 48-
He writes about how the experimentation with making napalm and flamethrowers was ALL done by Eric; “Dylan shows virtually no effort”, this assumption is made solely because there are few notes in Dylan’s hand. In Cullen’s estimation, Eric wrote it, so Eric did it. Dylan didn’t write it, so he didn’t do it.

He talks of how they had to figure out how to get the bombs into the cafeteria but since the bombs were so big they just decided to walk in with them, since they wouldn’t be able to hide them. “Psychopaths are reckless. They have supreme confidence in their work.”
Eric Harris seemed to me to be completely anally retentive, hence the obsessively detailed notes he took on everything. Reckless is not at all a word I’d used to describe him.
But, let’s say this did apply to Eric. Well, Dylan walked in with a bomb, too, so what does that make him?

He writes of their release from Diversion and says “Dylan had not planned on leaving the program alive.” Again, Dylan had been writing about his own death for 2 years, yet Cullen harps on that August 10th journal entry being the time that Dylan “really meant” to go ahead with suicide. Obviously he can't know this.

Cullen also writes that Eric was 100% on board with NBK with no reservations right after the van arrest. Reading his journal entries, this just isn’t true. He expressed some doubts as late as November 1998.
Cullen also says that “Dylan was conflicted, as always, still leaning against, heavily against. Dylan wanted to be a good boy. He had three choices: give in, back out, or perform a hasty suicide.”
He wanted to be a good boy?! Wow, just… wow.

Cullen claims that it was in typing the killer story for creative writing in February of 1999 that Dylan became as fully committed to NBK as he could be (even though “he would fight it almost to the end”). He acknowledges the similarity to their plans but says that the killer in the story is a blend between himself and Eric. “His height matches Dylan’s, but he behaves exactly like Eric: callous, methodical, viciously angry yet detached.” Again, he is claiming to be inside Dylan’s head to know such things.
Cullen also states “Submitting the story was probably an intentional leak. Dylan chickened out.” So, Dylan writes this essay because he’s trying to get caught, but when Eric films the HitMen for Hire video which literally shows him walking around MURDERING jocks, it's not a "leak", not trying to give himself away or be stopped, it's because the little psychopath is having a laugh in everyone’s face about not knowing what he was up to.
Yeah, ok then.

He writes of the making of the Rampart Range video.
We’ve all seen it- BOTH Eric and Dylan are shooting, both are practicing to improve their aim and handling of their guns. But he focuses only on Eric- Eric figures out how to shoot more quickly, Eric becomes “a killing machine.” And then he writes:
“Dr. Fuselier watched the Rampart video a few days after the massacre. It showed the final progression from fantasy to fact. It had been a two- year evolution from frivolous prankster missions to a series of escalating thefts. Eric was turning into a professional criminal. He had crossed the mental hurdle from imaging crimes to committing them. This was how it would feel.”
Eric. Eric was becoming the criminal. Dylan participated in every single activity listed in this paragraph but his criminal evolution is not mentioned at all. It’s only Eric. It's always Eric.

I never read Cullen's book, but I knew he was a big Dylan fanboy. But god, was he ever? What's up with his obsession that Dylan was so innocent?

hvernon wrote:

I never read Cullen's book, but I knew he was a big Dylan fanboy. But god, was he ever? What's up with his obsession that Dylan was so innocent?

IMO I think he has a big huge old crush on Dylan. Cullen is a gay man himself and I think he is a Dylan fan-boy.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Yes Eric did mention he was taking meds from Dr Albert to try to control his racing thoughts so I think you are correct there

hvernon wrote:

I never read Cullen's book, but I knew he was a big Dylan fanboy. But god, was he ever? What's up with his obsession that Dylan was so innocent?

It really is the most bizarre thing. It's like he's unable to recognize what Dylan was capable of- this kid who we all know stood above a wounded, defenseless boy and SHOT HIM IN THE FACE. This kid who mocked and laughed at other children before murdering them.

I think that most of us here recognize what Eric and Dylan did was horrible and unforgiveable. But we are able to also see them as whole people who had lives and feelings and something decent in them before they committed this terrible crime.
Cullen can't seem to do that. It's like he had to create this story about an irredeemable demon corrupting the little saintly boy in order to wrap his head around why Columbine happened. He had to have the devil figure/boogeyman to explain it away. And you can only have 1 boogeyman, so Dylan must have been coerced.  

Like I said, bizarre.

It does seem strange to have somebody both say "They weren't bullied, that's just an excuse for people who lionize them", which I don't think is necessarily wrong, and "Dylan was a good boy he didn't want to hurt anyone". It is a laugh to call him Dylan's biggest fangirl.

Also he is probably too old in body and spirit to wish to understand the perpetrators thoughts in any deep sense. It seems more "Tell me about the evil crazy murderers, Dr. Fuselier" authority-worship than thinking for himself. Frankly, I like to press those who say all criminals are mentally ill on whether would let them get off with an insanity plea.

Then again, I  think Cullen's biggest errors are the same errors one finds in all of the books. I also think his attempt to view them as separate, contrasting people is a good thing, even if I think his application of that thought was misguided by Fuselier, Eric being older, Eric's journals, etc.

Chapter 49-
Most of the things in this chapter I believe to be true as I have read much of it through other sources. However, there are a few things, like the lawsuits, and details about Fuselier, DeAngelis, and Ireland that I don’t know enough about to know if there are mistakes.

The chapter discusses:

-what Fuselier and DeAngelis did after the attack, how DeAngelis coped.

- the gradual release of more case evidence and how Jeffco kept hiding things, including the Guerra search warrant.

- Bowling For Columbine and the responses of Marilyn Manson and KMFDM.

- how the Klebold’s coped and how conducting Dylan’s service and supporting the Klebold’s damaged Rev. Marxhausen’s career.

- lawsuits and the Harris/ Klebold depositions and how Fuselier would have liked to question the parents
[To learn, of course, when Eric started to show signs of psychopathy. There is no mention as to wondering how the hell Dylan decided murder was ok to do).

- Patrick Ireland’s recovery, going to college

- some copycat plans that were foiled; school’s adopting “zero tolerance” and changes by law enforcement in recognizing and responding to threats

Chapter 50-
Cullen claims that shortly before the shooting, it was Eric who decided to film the Basement Tapes.
“Eric wanted to be remembered. He spent a year on “The Book of God,” but five weeks before Judgment Day, he decided that wasn’t good enough. He wanted a starring role on-camera.”
He even goes so far as to say that for the first tape, Eric “continued making camera adjustments after he was rolling- perhaps as a sneaky way to ensure his audience would be clear on the director.”  
He also says that while Dylan was “wild and animated and angry” and Eric was “mostly calm and controlled.” That they “spoke with one voice: Eric’s.”

I think we've discussed before that Dylan was the one that seemed to treat this whole thing like more of a movie he was living, both before and during the attack. Dylan is also the one who spoke of directors fighting over their story. He was every bit as involved in video productions as Eric. I think it's ludicrous to imply that he was just going along with what Eric wanted to do since making videos had been such a big part of BOTH of their lives for the year before their deaths.

Cullen writes of some of the stuff they talked about on the tapes. And in some rare honesty he writes about the nice things Eric said about his parents and then “Dylan was less generous.” And “Dylan bemoaned the guilt they would feel, but then ridiculed it.”
But then he moves on to “Eric outdid Dylan with the apologies. To the untrained eye, he seemed sincere. The psychologists on the case found Eric less convincing. They saw a psychopath. Classic. He even pulled the stunt of self-diagnosing to dismiss it. ‘I wish I was a fucking sociopath so I didn’t have any remorse,’ Eric said. ‘But I do.’ Watching that made Dr. Fuselier angry. Remorse meant a deep desire to correct a mistake. Eric hadn’t done it yet. He excused his actions several times on the tapes. Fuselier was tough to rattle, but that got to him. ‘Those are the most worthless apologies I’ve ever heard in my life,’ he said. It got more ludicrous later, when Eric willed some of his stuff to two buddies, ‘if you guys live.” ‘If you live?’ Fuselier repeated. ‘They are going to go in there and quite possibly kill their friends. If they were the least bit sorry, they would not do it!” This is exactly the sort of false of apology Dr. Cleckley identified in 1941.”  
Cleckley, of course, was one of the people who first documented traits of psychopaths.
So, BOTH Dylan and Eric apologize to their parents, but Dylan ridicules his mom, mocking her voice saying if only they'd found the tapes sooner. BOTH express remorse but STILL WENT THROUGH with the attack. And BOTH tell Nate and Chris that they can have their belongings if they live- knowing full well that they may be killing their friends in this attack.
But ONLY Eric is the remorseless psychopath?

I think he also threw in a dig to the reporters that got to see the tapes. Cullen, of course, did not.
He wrote that “a group of experienced journalists from the top papers in the country watched him perform on the Basement Tapes. Most reported Eric apologizing and showing remorse. They marveled at his repentance.”
Bitter much? It seems like he's trying to rub in that even though he didn't get to see them, THEY just didn't understand what was actually going on in them like Cullen did.

Cullen also claims that Dylan did the BTs mostly as a way of showing Eric how invested he was in the plan.
Because, ya know, Dylan told Cullen as much while he was braiding his hair, I guess.

He also makes a comment about how Eric “seems to have been funding most of the operation.”
There is absolutely no proof of this. I’m assuming he’s making this guess because some receipts were found at Eric’s house, but they paid cash and obviously purchased most of the stuff while together so he has no basis for assuming Eric fronted the money. Dylan had a job and didn't seem to have a lot of expenses. Hell, Eric wasted half his money at Media Play on CDs!

thelmar wrote:

Chapter 50-
Cullen claims that shortly before the shooting, it was Eric who decided to film the Basement Tapes.
“Eric wanted to be remembered. He spent a year on “The Book of God,” but five weeks before Judgment Day, he decided that wasn’t good enough. He wanted a starring role on-camera.”

Psychopaths don't generally want to publicize their crimes, but they do want the credit for them and enjoy bragging about their exploits to others. I think that impulse is part narcissism, part need for arousal and invincibility. Psychopaths crave rewards that aren't tangible (e.g., Ted Bundy wanted to represent himself in court, which is highly narcissistic, Dick Hickock doing handstands to impress the ladies in Miami Beach, which I think might have demonstrated his glibness and arrogance, etc). I hesitate to state that that is what prompted the basement tapes, but I have at least a hypothesis, and that is that they were prepping themselves for the massacre. I think this question deserves its own thread because it's still an open question. What do you think motivated the basement tapes?

thelmar wrote:

He also says that while Dylan was “wild and animated and angry” and Eric was “mostly calm and controlled.” That they “spoke with one voice: Eric’s.”

And this is why JCSO SHOULD have released the tapes. Journalists who have seen the tapes state that Eric acted as an emcee, introducing topics and Dylan adding support in the background. I'm not sure if Dylan ever introduced topics in the tapes, but I would like to know for future reference.

thelmar wrote:

Dylan is also the one who spoke of directors fighting over their story.

Is that right? I thought both boys said that. I have the official police report, which doesn't state in explicit detail who said what.

thelmar wrote:

To the untrained eye, he seemed sincere. The psychologists on the case found Eric less convincing. They saw a psychopath. Classic. He even pulled the stunt of self-diagnosing to dismiss it. ‘I wish I was a fucking sociopath so I didn’t have any remorse,’ Eric said. ‘But I do.’ Watching that made Dr. Fuselier angry. Remorse meant a deep desire to correct a mistake. Eric hadn’t done it yet.

Fuselier is correct here. I found Eric's excuses pathetic and glib, so I had trouble believing Eric's apologies. I still do to some extent. People who apologize rarely, if ever, dramatize the event. They want to rectify the injury and move on. Dylan, at least, was honest and believable.

thelmar wrote:

But ONLY Eric is the remorseless psychopath?

Good point. Both did this massacre, both were sane individuals who knew the repercussions of their actions. To understand a school shooter's mental state of mind, you have to think like a suicide bomber. I think both Eric and Dylan have more in common with terrorists who stage political protests to common criminals (e.g., serial killers). I am not suggesting Eric or Dylan had similar motivations to terrorists, but the parallels are similar.

thelmar wrote:

I think he also threw in a dig to the reporters that got to see the tapes. Cullen, of course, did not.
He wrote that “a group of experienced journalists from the top papers in the country watched him perform on the Basement Tapes. Most reported Eric apologizing and showing remorse. They marveled at his repentance.”
Bitter much? It seems like he's trying to rub in that even though he didn't get to see them, THEY just didn't understand what was actually going on in them like Cullen did.

I am bitter for not seeing the tapes, too. In fact, I am so upset that JCSO destroyed all the tapes, which are in the public domain and could be used by psychologists to understand school shooters. None of this mattered to JCSO: not then, and certainly not now.

thelmar wrote:

He also makes a comment about how Eric “seems to have been funding most of the operation.”
There is absolutely no proof of this.

It would be interesting to see a tally of all NBK expenses. I am sure it's possible to go through all the bombs, propane tanks, guns, timers, etc, determine who paid for what, and how much each item cost. If Dylan, or Eric, paid cash for their items, there has to be a paper trail somewhere.

jada887 wrote:

I think this question deserves its own thread because it's still an open question. What do you think motivated the basement tapes?

This would be a good thread. Personally, I think it was a natural extension for them. They were heavily into computers and video production as a means of expressing themselves. I think the video was another form of self expression; to explain their plans, their reasons. I don't think the tapes themselves were a search for any kind of "glory", NBK is what they thought would bring that.

jada887 wrote:

And this is why JCSO SHOULD have released the tapes. Journalists who have seen the tapes state that Eric acted as an emcee, introducing topics and Dylan adding support in the background. I'm not sure if Dylan ever introduced topics in the tapes, but I would like to know for future reference.

jada887 wrote:

Fuselier is correct here. I found Eric's excuses pathetic and glib, so I had trouble believing Eric's apologies. I still do to some extent. People who apologize rarely, if ever, dramatize the event. They want to rectify the injury and move on. Dylan, at least, was honest and believable.

Agreed, they should have released the tapes so that we wouldn't have to depend on a small subset of people to interpret for us how each boy behaved, what the dynamic was between the two, etc. Having not actually seen Eric expressing his apologies to his parents, I can't make a judgement about how sincere or insincere he was. I feel like, based upon what Cullen wrote and Fuselier has said, Fuselier diagnosed Eric a psychopath after reading his journal and before seeing the tapes. So, he was looking through that lens when he viewed the tapes- his own confirmation bias, if you will. For that reason, I have trouble just accepting that Eric really behaved on the tapes the way that Fuselier claimed.

jada887 wrote:

thelmar wrote:

Dylan is also the one who spoke of directors fighting over their story.

Is that right? I thought both boys said that. I have the official police report, which doesn't state in explicit detail who said what.

I don't believe the police transcript even makes mention of them hoping a movie would be made about them. According to the Time article (which I believe to be a fairly faithful representation of the tapes because the police allowed the reporters a good amount of access to them), it doesn't say which boy brought up the subject of movies being made about them but it does state that Dylan is the one who said, "Directors will be fighting over this story."
In his transcripts of the Basement Tapes, Peter Langman also writes that Dylan said this, as well as saying "I know we’re gonna have followers because we’re so fucking God-like. We’re not exactly human — we have human bodies but we’ve evolved into one step above you, fucking human shit. We actually have fucking self-awareness."
I do not know how Langman came to have this knowledge of the tapes, as I didn't think he actually saw them. But, it certainly sounds like something Dylan would say!

By all means do so, but do so with an open mind. I havent fact checked everything(in fact Im a bit slow), but I think People should trie to read the updated Version, as he changed certain things that he stated in the book. I cant recall exactly where but theres an updated Version.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Also, if you need some fact checking I found the school shooters. Info to be very helpful in order to get a clearer view:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A lot of ressources on that webside dwells into withness accounts and contextualize them. Its possible to end up with several conclusions at the same time as you go along. Some of these withness accounts were dead wrong, because the media got the stories wrong. Namely because the media got the story wrong. And so People repeated what they had heard on the news, they confused the TCM with Eric and Dylan and this got mixed up with the narrative about bullying. Now, Ive read the book by Brooks Brown, and other accounts and Im not denying that they were bullied. But Im very positive that some accounts were wrongly attributed to them, and thats because Langman delves into the subject on how the media mixed up Eric and Dylan and the TCM. I think that Langman does a great deal in delving into withness testimonies at hes webside. He came to the conclusion that they were bullied, but not to the extent that media portrayed it and that there were other students that endured truly abusive behaviour, but Eric was not one of them.

This whole thing about them being goth: I have a friend that is goth and I am partially into that scene. IDK where People got this whole thing from that they were goth. They Just dont fit into that 'profile'.

I could go on, theres a lot of things that I find puzzling in how the media portrayed that case. I dont dispute that Eric was a psychopath. Thats not up to me to decide, I think experts should make that decision,but other than that if People want to reseach the tragedy, School shooters. Info was something that I found very helpful.

How EH died according to Dave Cullen[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

"He had chicks lot of chicks"

I think @Thelmars right that Cullen exagarated the part of dates. Just found Peter Langmanns article

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Rebbie556 wrote:

How  EH died according to Dave Cullen[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

"He had chicks lot of chicks"

.
Its a bit of an exxaggation. He did have a number of GF. But he didnt succeed very well. It seems to me like Cullen didnt mention that