During the last months of 2011, homeless people on Orange County, California, were somewhat terrorized. Three homeless people had been stabbed to death multiple times and policed speculated that these murders were the acts of a serial killer. When the Los Angeles Times released all the speculations, they used a photograph of John Berry, a homeless Vietnam War veteran who had slept by the riverbed in Anaheim for years. A few days after, he was brutally stabbed in a public shopping center in front of various witnesses. The civilians chased him and he was later arrested by the police. The man they had captured was Itzcoatl Ocampo, a 23 year old Iraq war veteran. He had been honorably discharged from the Marine Corps in 2010. After he was arrested, investigators found a list of future victims Ocampo had planned to stalk and kill. They also found hat this man followed media about his killings very closely. Ocampo is being charged with the four murders but there is no evidence indicating his desire to plead or not.
As I read this article, the biggest question that came to me was, "How in the world is this man killing the people he once protected?" This irony was sick. I know war can change people, do horrible things, and most certainly leave scars that will never leave. I also wondered if his experiences during the war had created somewhat of a motive to kill these innocent homeless people. Or maybe it built some sort of anger inside him that led him to find relief in brutally killings. This man killed with absolute anger as if he had a personal problem with the victims. 40-60 stabs per person is evidence of the anger he exhibited on his victims. What also caught my attention was that, if this was the case (war had caused enough psychological damage), then why was he not treated after his release? Or maybe he was treated, there's not enough information to jump into conclusions. But if he was treated, why wasn't he treated longer? Did his insurance "run out"? Shouldn't war veterans have elongated psychological treatments after war due to all the things they experience? Maybe our government should take a deeper look at all this and compare it to cases of other men that have defended our country.
Lovett, Ian. "Veteran Charged in Slayings of Four Homeless Men." www.nytimes.com. New York Times, 2012. Web. 25 Feb 2012.
Posts
Great post. It suppressed me when you wrote that the murder was a young Marine that killed a Vet. I also ponder the question as to why he killed someone he went to war to protect, on top of the fact that he killed another fellow solider. I agree with you that the government should supply veterans with more coverage for psychologists. The vets need to talk and release the guilt on the effects of war and not just be discharged and realized into the population.
ReplyDeleteWhat an interesting, ironic situation. No matter the motive of this Marine though, I believe the continued murders of his innocent victims are unconditionally reprehensible. Yes, the government should take more care in providing for our physically and mentally distressed veterans, but the lives of four poor souls shouldn't be regarded as the tragic effects of the aftermath of war. Was it even truly proven that his cause for killing originated from post-war related issues?
ReplyDeleteMaybe his killings had some reason behind it. I am not saying in any way that this is acceptable; what he did was indeed horrendous. But maybe he had some personal problem with the four victims. I wonder if there were any other connections between the people he killed other than being homeless. This could help us better understand the reason behind his actions.
ReplyDelete