Talk:Charles Whitman

Author's notice

I copied the following from the edit summary:

20:53, 17 June 2010 John Calvin Moore (Talk | contribs) (28,520 bytes) (I wrote 90% of the Wikipedia article and posted the photos and docs there, this will be done with the same. I made a major overhaul of the WP article here, licensing should be here for Citizen)

--Peter Schmitt 13:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello Peter and everybody - a lot said here is true. I did apparently nominate the article premature. I also find the format here excellent, with some difficulty of losing the WP ways of doing things. Let's consider this newbiw mistakes. Also, the email change took me several days to find the link to change my email address, buried in a google folder. Also, I would appreciate some help on what is the best source for formatting. Thanks! John Calvin Moore 21:27, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Nomination mistake?

I'm not sure if John meant to nominate the article for approval, or if he doesn't totally understand the metadata and it was a mistake. If it was intended, then it will need other Editors as he has written the majority of the article. Also, the metadata will need updating to include a specific version, rather than just the URL of the article itself. --Chris Key 12:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

When I fixed the Metadata, I also noticed the missing permanent link, but since this will need Constable interaction, I simply left it as it is. --Peter Schmitt 13:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

In many ways, this is a very historically significant article. While I'm quite aware of the Bath incident, it is the first spree killing of which many Americans are aware. As such, it will be even more valuable tied to other articles on mass murder, some of which certainly need to be written.

It's not uncommon for people to bring material from WP and put it up for immediate Approval, but that rarely if ever happens, the simplest reason being that new Citizens may not be aware of formatting conventions here, and of the titles of relevant existing articles that should be wikilinked back and forth. If nothing else, even if one is an Editor, one cannot nominate, without other Editors, an article to which one contributed substantially.

While we certainly don't demand that everything written by an expert be sourced, some of the statements here do seem speculative and should either be made more specific or sourced. As a CZ: History Workgroup Editor, I'd say this is a status 2 (developing) article. I'd actively like to work with it, which will mean that three Editors will have to approve -- that should not be a problem. Coincidentally, I've been doing some work in neurology and oncology, and this was an impetus to start the glioblastoma article, to which I'll be adding. Howard C. Berkowitz 14:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Chris, yes it was a mistake. When the form popped up, I thought it was a pre-requisite. Now I know it is not.

Thanks Peter, sorry for your issue with the Metadata link, that will not be an issue in the future with other articles from me.

Howard, your question to me on your page allowed me to find this page. Thank you! You are right, the tower incident is significantly historical. My findings however, do not classify Whitman as a "Spree Killer", and please bear with me, I will make that case in the final rendering of the article. Yes, he killed his wife and mother in different locations, but those murders were separate from the motivations of the tower shootings, we can discuss that together if you like. John Calvin Moore 21:41, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

When I speak of spree killing, I was thinking only of the tower part. I don't want to say that the killing of his wife and mother are insignificant, but my understanding of "spree" is multiple victims within a short period of time, often but not necessarily at the same location. Several recent college incidents, where the killer moved in or among buildings, still are sprees in that the multiple killings were separated by only a brief period of time.

I'll have to hunt for references, but this was significant not just in terms of police response, but of a lack of medical capability -- that which was called an emergency room really wasn't one by modern standards, certainly with no existing plan to deal with a multiple casualty incident. From the police standpoint, this was more straightforward than a moving "active shooter" such as Columbine, but, in the sixties, only the military really would have had an idea how to take out a sniper. My understanding is that the Whitman incident was one of the motivators for the formation of SWAT teams. Howard C. Berkowitz 21:56, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

As with all categorical situations, there are different thoughts about the meanings. A mass murderer has to kill four people within a short period of time is the standard. Spree killers, kill four or more people over different locations at random. Whitman's mother and wife were not random, he killed them for a specific reason, the tower shootings and murders were random, there in lies the distinction. As to swat, Chief Gates in LA never references Whitman by name, and was more concerned with the "Black Panthers" and the Watts Riots as an impetus to form a specialized unit to deal with issues that went beyond the traditional role of the police officer. However, I am not saying Whitman and the tower incident didn't have have an influence, I'm just saying there is nothing from the history of swat reports, that mention Whitman by name, or the tower incident.John Calvin Moore 22:46, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

(undent) The assumption I have made, which I think is consistent with FBI definitions, is that both spree killers and serial killers are subsets of mass murderer. Your definition of four or more fits mass murderer.

Further, I'm not sure that it is agreed that randomness is a quality of either, although the mass murderer doesn't usually know the victims as well as what the British call "ordinary decent criminals". The Unabomber, for example, certainly had types of targets in mind.

Not to suggest expertise I don't have, I know the emergency medical side of this incident, and how it was seen as showing systemic deficiencies. I'll do some research on this, but I seem to remember some trauma physicians, coincidentally in Texas, mentioning it in the development of civilian handling of large numbers of casualties. Also, I'm familiar with military sniping and counter-sniper response. You might find it interesting, for example, to compare and contrast the Detroit police and Michigan National Guard counter-sniper tactics in the 1967 riots, versus those of the brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division that eventually was part of the response; this is in the Kerner Report and probably the Field Manual on Civil Disturbances and Disasters.

It sounds as if we need to work out a taxonomy agreed-to at Citizendium. While he's traveling, User: Roger A. Lohmann may have some specific insights. Howard C. Berkowitz 23:23, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure. I'm sorry if I made the error of conveying that all mass murderers use randomness. A mass murderer may walk into any public place, former employer or other scenario and kill four or more people and get the label. Kacynski was more of a terrorist and only killed three people, his motives may have been in the same vein as either a serial killer or mass murder due to the unknown (even to Kacynski) outcomes of each device. I have personal experience with the Detroit riots of '67, as I was Downtown at the local hippy community when the sirens and orange light of the fire in certain areas, signaled something was wrong. When the word hit the street, some of us went through the Windsor tunnel to flee the alarm. I took a course at Wayne State years later that focused on the event and responses, my knowledge on it now is minimal at best, outside the personal aspects.

I have information about Brackenridge Hospital at the time of Whitman's assault. The hospital was totally unprepared for the event. The emergency room and the blood bank were at opposite sides and the time to get the blood transfered from one area to the next was alarming. The normal pace of scheduled operations and blood supply was fitting for the hospitals needs of the time. After the event, the protocols changed and the blood distribution was made more accessible. In talking with a doctor who was there and remained there for years afterwards, he claims the event and the change in protocols have saved more lives than Whitman took, by twenty-fold. That's about the only positive of the tragedy. John Calvin Moore 00:45, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Autopsy problems section

From the article: ==Autopsy Problems==

At the Cook Funeral Home on August 2, 1966, an autopsy was performed as requested in Whitman's suicide note and approved by Whitman's father, Charles Adolf Whitman, and performed by Dr. Chenar, who found a brain tumor and initially reported as an astrocytoma brain tumor in the Autopsy Protocol Report, although results from the subsequent Governor's report investigation doctor's revealed the tumor was a grade 4 Glioblastoma Multiforme that conceivably could have been a factor in Whitman's actions.

Although Whitman had been prescribed drugs, and Whitman had a vial containing dextroamphetamine on his body after his death, the autopsy could not establish if he had consumed any drugs prior to the shooting. Whitman's bodily fluids had been removed and his body embalmed prior to the autopsy, so there was no urine to test for the amphetamines. However, it was revealed during the autopsy that Whitman had a Glioblastoma tumor in the hypothalamus region of his brain. Some have theorized that this may have been pressed against the nearby amygdala, which can have an effect on fight/flight responses. This has led some neurologists to speculate that his medical condition was in some way responsible for the attacks, as well as his personal and social frames of reference.

A few clarifications: a glioblastoma (or glioblastoma multiforme) is a grade IV astrocytoma, by the WHO classification. It also may be reported as a grade IV glioma. The text suggests there is some conflict in the report, but each of the mention of a tumor refers to the same histopathological diagnosis.

"Body fluids" is adequate; amphetamine testing can be done on blood as well.

I think a bit more clarification of the speculation about the hypothalamic tumor pressing on the amygdala is needed. The reference is a bit confusing: as a PhD, Rhawn Joseph could not be a neurologist. What neurologists are doing the speculation? (ooops) Howard C. Berkowitz

---

To unsigned above. Yes, Glioblastoma is a grade 4 Astrocytoma. The conflict in the report is that Dr. Chenar, who did the original autopsy, described the tumor as as Astrocytoma only, and mentioned it had no effect on Whitman or his actions. The commission, exhumed his body after seeing the parafin slides and classified the tumor as a Glio4 due to the observation of Necrosis by Dr. Chenar. That made it a new ballgame. As to the blood testing for amphetamines, you are right. However, Whitman was killed on August 1, and his wounds had bleed out a lot of blood on the tower, in transport to the funeral home, and his body was embalmed on August 1 - the autopsy and attempt to collect fluids was done on August 2, the tests were inconclusive. That will be made clear. I have a photo of Whitman on the morgue slab showing the embalming leaking from his wounds to illustrate the point. The speculation points are left over from another WP editor. That will be removed. John Calvin Moore 21:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

In 1966, all histological slides, other than quick frozen sections, were embedded in paraffin. Believe me, I felt embedded in something when I went through the process of sectioning and staining with that technology, which took a week or so of tedium. We do have the problem that definitions of astrocytoma and glioblastoma were not really standardized in 1966, but around 1993.

I don't know the testing technology available then for amphetamines, so you may well be right that it could not be done then. I was involved in a good deal of drug urine testing in 1970, and, as I remember, the confirmatory test was thin-layer chromatography. Howard C. Berkowitz 23:30, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Diagnoses and interpretation in general

From the lede, after updating wikilinks, "By today's standards, his personality would have been deemed narcissistic with borderline personality features NOS, (not otherwise specified)." I believe a specific diagnosis, especially in a mixed DSM category, needs sourcing, or at least a substantial analysis. Howard C. Berkowitz 18:58, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Glioblastoma

Unfortunately, the symptoms described are too nonspecific, in my opinion, even to suggest a diagnosis. In the 1960s, the only certain diagnosis was microscopic examination at surgery or autopsy. Today, MRI would give a good suggestion, but the histopathological diagnosis remains the only sure thing.

Why try to make an issue of the earlier symptoms when there is clear autopsy evidence of a tumor? Now, it is worth backtracking on dates, and it also would be informative to know if there was any assessment of the progression of the growth. While I'd want to look for figures in the 1960s, I'd suspect that median survival for an untreated glioblastoma was under 4 months. That fairly rules out any of the symptoms during the Marine service being due to it -- he would have died soon afterwards. Recent seizure activity, however, is potentially relevant. There does need to be some sourcing on why the UofT is believed to have such records. Howard C. Berkowitz 23:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

The diagnosis and interpretations will come from interviews with FBI agents and the family Priest in Lake Worth, Florida. As to the Glioblastoma, the Marines medical records have several accounts of Whitman complaining about dizziness, vomiting and nausea. As I'm sure you are aware, a grade four, takes time to get there from a grade one. There is also a record that shows his eyesight shifted dramatically in a short time and had a prescription for eyeglasses made. Time magazines photo of Whitman shows him reading the paper on his porch with eyeglasses. And you are right, Whitman would have been dead within a few months if he had never gone up on the tower. As to the UT having records, I was referred to Attorney Lee there who told me the University would not release the records without a court order. I didn;t have several years for the process. However, I do have interviews with a victim who was shot by Whitman and she worked at the University health Center at that time and remembers Whitman yelling at the director within a few days before the tragedy. Also an interview with Whitman's advisor at the Engineering School who had insight and was called to identify Whitman's body. Can we upload audio files? John Calvin Moore 22:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I haven't done it, but I believe you can upload audio. That's probably a question best asked on the Forums.

We should get other editors to weigh in on interviews you've done. Have these been published? I'm thinking in terms of the original research aspects, although there are potentially ways to handle that. Howard C. Berkowitz 23:34, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Removing "to Approve" notice

I am removing the Editorial to Approve stuff -- there is no date, and, as a complete newcomer to CZ, I think he is simply not at home with the Metadata process. Hayford Peirce 16:28, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Hayford, sorry about the inconvenience. John Calvin Moore 22:15, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I should have probably waited to hear from you definitively on the issue but I thought it was 99% certain to be a mistake. The Metadata has baffled better minds than mine, I think, and it's sure baffled me at times! Hayford Peirce 22:17, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Document images

I'd like to hear from others on this, but I hesitate to put up document images rather than bibliographic citations to the documents contained in them. There's nothing wrong with putting the image in a Gallery subpage, but I'm not sure what the image adds to the main article. Howard C. Berkowitz 22:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

This is late coming after our discussion earlier Howard, so if anyone knows how to hyperlink a document to a blue word, please advise. Thanks! John Calvin Moore 22:18, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Infobox and other Editor comments

I'll ask for other comments, but, in general, we don't make extensive use of infoboxes other than for specialized things such as chemicals. Think of it as a look-and-feel difference from WP.

Charles Joseph Whitman
Other names	Charlie
Born	24th June 1941 Lake Worth, Florida
Died	1st August 1966 University of Texas Tower - Austin, Texas
Occupation	Student
Religion	Roman Catholic turned agnostic
Notable relations	Kathleen Whitman
University of Texas Sniper

Again, I urge to write narratives about the content of documents and give a bibliographic citation, rather than insert the scanned images. If there's something specific in the image (i.e., beyond the text), it could be graphically emphasized or put in a Gallery subpage.

As far as diagnoses and implications, these really need support and not speculation. The brain tumor symptoms are not very specific, and, if he had had a glioblastoma in the Marines, he would have been dead in months.

The media and YouTube comes across as a bit argumentative -- perhaps you could paraphrase? Howard C. Berkowitz 18:52, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll give thought or take suggestions on the referencing of the documents. I am not saying Whitman had a grade four in the Marines, I am saying he had a tumor growing while in the Marines that was identified as a grade four Glio after his death. As to the media and youtube, I agree, however, they made the errors as well as the experts, if that is argumentative, I accept that. John Calvin Moore 22:25, 19 June 2010 (UTC)