Talk:Seung-Hui Cho

This talk page is automatically archived by Miszabot. Any sections older than 24 hours are automatically archived to Talk:Seung-Hui Cho/Archive 5. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Myspace Page

The private Myspace page indicated as being that of Cho Seung-hui's in the "External Links" section of the article is not in fact his at all. Use of a code from www.joyboner.com reveals that the signup date of the owner of the page is 4/17/07. This link should be removed from the article.

Unsourced photo

The photo has been re-cropped to remove the second person, but it still is not sourced. The newly cropped image has also had the name tag removed from view, the original name displayed as Hui. It appears to me that someone found a picture of an Asian soldier and decided to post it... I recommend immediate delete. Pissedpat 03:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about an immediate delete, since it might actually be genuine. But it should at least be removed from the main article until that can be confirmed. --Sleepvivid 03:53, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The only problem is that his nametag reads "Hu", not "Hui". It's obviously a hoax. Parsecboy 06:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit By Nathan Fluet webmaster of abuse-of-power.org : The way to discern the authenticity of a photo is not by looking at a name tag please look at these enlarged comparisons http://abuse-of-power.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=314 of the image alongside 2 known photos of Cho from NBC there are common scars and both the eyes, nose and brow all match the eyebrows don't but again you don't use hair to match a subject you use facial structure and this my friends is Cho. Abuseofpower 10:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

"Holy Jesus, an Asian-lookin' guy in MARPAT! It must be that Korean guy from the news, since there can't possibly be any Asian-lookin' folks who are actually in the American armed forces, and, well... the logic still breaks down ... But that must still be him!"

This is an obvious hoax. --Dynaflow 11:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Wow you cant even click on a link and look at the comparison huh so you know i have even shown this comparison to a South Korean and he said it is the same person too, this isn't a round eye seeing all Asians as looking the same as i said there is even a common scar. Abuseofpower 12:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I did click the link, I did look, and I am far from convinced. One of the reasons people wear balaclavas (besides to keep sand and dust out of their mouths while on patrol) is to conceal their identities. It is very hard to identify someone by the bridge of his or her nose, and any identification of this photograph's subjects will be tenuous in the extreme (read: a wild stab in the dark) until someone comes up with a verifiable source for where it came from, who took it, and when. Until then, my hoax RADAR is on full alert. --Dynaflow 12:15, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

That is a good picture to prove my method of comparing facial structure, in this picture we see almond shaped eyes relatively evenly tapered at each side in the picture in question and in all known picture of Cho the eyes are wider on the inside edge and tapers on the outside edge, next this mans brow is not near as pronounced as the brow of Cho but the man in the picture in question has the same structure to his brow as Cho, next is to compare the space between the eyes, and then the space from the inner edge of the eye to the side of the bridge of the nose, next comes measurement of the length and width of the nose followed by scar identification and comparison. All of these comparisons show this picture in question is in fact Cho, when you have a arguement slightly more scientific I would look forward to hearing it. Abuseofpower 12:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Do you know many Asian people? These are extremely common features you're listing. Two big holes, aside from the obvious:

1. The healed scar on the Marine is being correlated to a raised blemish on the soon-to-be-dead Cho. We can assume the blemish never had time to heal on the latter if the reports are true that Cho's last-minute multimedia extravaganza was put together the day of his rampage.
2. Also, if you look at the Marine, he has a widow's peak hair formation, while Cho does not show the same (genetically-mediated) feature even though his hair is cut to the same length as the Marine's. --Dynaflow 12:32, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Try this: Take the photos into Photoshop (or download GIMP -- it's free!) and start messing around with hues and saturation and such, and you will start to see other features come out that you can't see easily in the normal versions of the photographs, like the raised blemish on Cho. --Dynaflow 12:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Hairlines can be easily modified as the eyebrows can look at the Virginia tech ID picture and the NBC pictures his eyebrows are longer in the ID this proves nothing are you going to say the ID picture isn't Cho now? And if you want i can add Cho's ID to the comparison as the scar is visible in that picture too as well as the marine picture. And to answer your question I grew up with all Laotian, Vietnamese and South Koreans my best friends back home were all of those nationalities and I used to speak Laotian fairly well, you want to paint me as a ignorant person who thinks all Asians look alike the fact of the matter is that i can tell most Asian peoples nationality by looking at there face because each country has its own unique facial characteristics, foreheads, brows, eye shape, cheekbone structure etc... for you to attempt to say that you cant match these available facial features including the shape and size of the nose, the outline of which is clearly visible through the balaclava is ridiculous do you think that every Asian persons eyes are the same distance apart and that every one of there noses is the same length,eyes the same width and shape, and that they all have matching scars on there brows lets be serious here..Abuseofpower 13:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I really don't want to come off as an ass in this, but let's just say your theory is true. That this photo is of Cho. Well first off, if it is, it had to have been taken recently, as some of his photos that he took himself, his hair is not fully shaved, and then in others they are. I am talking about some of the photos of him just recently. So what happens to all of the other pictures where he has long hair, and when exactly did he find the time to join the Marines? When he was still living at the dorm in V-Tech. These are small factors you have to look at. Being prior military, you cannot join the military for all of the following reasons:

1 - You must be atleast 18 to join the military, where as Cho was enrolled in college at this age

2 - You can be in the military with mental disorders, but they will not let you join, if you have these mental disorders, without proper treatment, not to mention, they would have more medical paperwork to go with.

3 - One thing that stands out here, is if this is Cho, in the "MARINES" he would not be able to attend full time college, as the Marines do not have a National Guard based program, where you only attend one weekend a month.

As I said, I don't want to come off as an ass, but I too have taken good looks at the photos, and there are alot of parts that don't match. His eyebrows for one, his skin color is a very different hue in the military photo than in his normal photos. Many blemishes that you are pointing out is much harder to see due to the pixelation of the other photos. The fact that the Marine has the widows peak, and Cho does not, is a big one. Yes, hairlines can be changed. But the fact is, Cho had just recently shaved his head, before the killings. Not to mention, when you look at the photos of him with hair, he does not bare the line that the marine does, because it would still stand out with hair. Just as mine does... sadly... Anyway, this photo is definately a fake to try and start shit with the American Government, just to pull us all apart. Or it is Cho, but, he was not in the Marines. --CorpusDelecti 16:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know that there is much need to dwell on it further. The image has been deleted. If it is reuploaded again, it will be deleted again. --BigDT (416) 16:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

It's just a matter of discussion! =D--CorpusDelecti 17:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry your not, but your arguement is no good hair grows back fast and the time it would take, even for the picture he has the longest hair in would be a few months from a high and tight, also his mental illness was not diagnosed until 2005 and he is 23 so that wouldn't have been a factor in joining the services if he say joined at 18, if i did my math right he started at VT when he was 19. If he served only a year or less I doubt you would see the line, after many years of the same cut maybe, but not after 1. By the way i received my Honorable Discharge in February of 2006. Also do you know of any higher quality copies of the NBC photos because I will gladly debunk my own theory if they show things differently than the slightly pixelated ones. Abuseofpower 16:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for not bashing! =) As of now, I am unsure of any other photos, although I have been following this incident very closely and a friend of mine works with SAIC and they have been doing investigations with this matter. So I will be sure to try and supply whatever I am able to legally provide about it. Although, I do understand that he could have joined the Marines back when he was 18, however as stated by his family members, he was autistic, which I am pretty sure would have kept him out of the military. Also he was a perminent resident of the US but I have not seen anything stating that he was a nationalized citizen, which would also keep him from joining the American Armed Forces. However, as I said, if it is him, then this photo is just to make the military and the government look bad as it is being spread about. Which is wrong. There are actually a few sites stating that this whole thing was a Black Ops program to get gun control more intact. But also, you being prior military as well should know how easy it is for someone to get ahold of military uniforms and clothing. It is really not that hard, so even if it is him, it does not mean he was in the Marines, if he was, then he would have had to have been discharged right before going into college, because why would he pay to live in a dorm when he could have just as easily lived on the base close by for free? I dunno, I really don't believe that this picture is of Cho, or that he was in the military, and also I don't think I mentioned this earlier, but his Westernized (American) name was Seung-Hui Cho, Cho being his last name, which would have been what was on the name tag. No Hu, or Hui. That is another thing that people are looking past, and if he was in the Marines, I don't see why more people did not come about to give insight about Cho than have so far. Why only teachers, family and classmates? They also have yet to even look into whether he was enlisted or not. I dunno, I'm just ranting now, work is really boring today! LOL.--CorpusDelecti 17:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Two things: green-card holders are, in fact, allowed to join the military, though that should not distract us from the basic hoaxiness of the photo's reputed origins. Also, I don't really see what the angle is here. Is the accusation that the government is covering up the "fact" that Cho "was" a Marine? That would be pretty stupid, since records of having served in the armed forces are a matter of public record, and getting trapped in that kind of lie would be a matter of course. It's been my impression that the Marine Corps, in particular, has been somewhat proud, in a backhanded sort of way, of ex-Marines who snap and yet still revert to their training as highly efficient warriors (e.g. Charles Whitman and Lee Harvey Oswald. If Cho was a Marine, there's no reason for "Them" to not just 'fess up to it. What type of conspiracy theory is this hoax shilling for? --Dynaflow 17:37, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

You are seeming to miss out on the fact that he was also pretty much "autistic" which he would not have been able to enlist due to.--CorpusDelecti 17:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

"if it is him, then this photo is just to make the military and the government look bad as it is being spread about." this is only part right, if it is him it does make the government look bad but it also means that they aren't telling us the entire truth about the issue and people will spread this photo to enlighten our fellow citizens to this fact. About Hu, the name name Hu is Chinese, why it would be on a uniform Cho was wearing would only be speculation and conspiracy theories, I am basing my arguement strictly from observation of available data. About gun control that happens when people like Congressman Dennis Kucinich draft legislation the day after the shooting that will strip all Americans of all handguns unconditionally, see this pdf of the congressional record http://abuse-of-power.org/modules/wfdownloads/singlefile.php?cid=1&lid=61 Abuseofpower 18:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

... What? --Dynaflow 18:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I was addressing CorpusDelecti's comment, other then that was something unclear? Abuseofpower 19:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

All I'm trying to say is, since he was autistic there is no way that he would have been able to join the military. I've just never heard of it.--CorpusDelecti 13:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

All you have to do is watch the video he sent to NBC and you can see that he isn't autistic. Have you ever known someone with autism, and I mean true autism not this sliding scale of autism severity they try and dish us now, Ill tell you that I grew up with a Autistic friend and there is no way he could sat there reading through all of that material on camera without freaking out, that all my friend did like every 5 minutes he would freak out and scream and through a fit. They can not even behave in a mildly normal fashion and are by no means "quiet" people. Abuseofpower 21:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry to say my friend, but that is the likes of Turrets Syndrome, not Autism. Autism is exactly what Cho had shown. Especially when he was reading, his speech was very slow, and his voice was almost as if he could not speak. Sounding much as if he were deaf or mute and trying to make the sounds. This is the definition and symptoms of Autism.

This is pulled off of Wiki itself.

Autism is classified by the World Health Organization (WHO) and American Psychological Association as a developmental disability that results from a disorder of the human central nervous system.[1] It is diagnosed using specific criteria for impairments to social interaction, communication, interests, imagination and activities.[2] The causes, symptoms, etiology, treatment, and other issues are controversial.

Autism manifests itself "before the age of three years" according to the WHO's International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10).[3] Children with autism are marked by delays in their "social interaction, language as used in social communication, or symbolic or imaginative play" (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders).[4]

Autism, and the other four pervasive developmental disorders (PDD), are all considered to be neurodevelopmental disorders. They are diagnosed on the basis of a triad, or group of three behavioral impairments or dysfunctions: 1. impaired social interaction, 2. impaired communication and 3. restricted and repetitive interests and activities.[5] These three basic characteristics reflect Dr. Leo Kanner's first reports of autism emphasizing "autistic aloneness" and "insistence on sameness."

And the symptoms are as follows for children, have not found adults yet:

Noted Behaviors in Children

stares into open areas, doesn't focus on anything specific.

does not respond to his/her name.

cannot explain what he/she wants.

language skills are slow to develop or speech is delayed.

doesn't follow directions.

will fuss if didn't get what wanted.

at times, the child seems to be deaf.

doesn't point or wave "bye-bye."

doesn't understand the concept of pointing; will look at the hand pointing rather than the object being pointed at.

used to say a few words or babble, but now he/she doesn't.

throws intense or violent tantrums.

has odd movement patterns.

likes to spin around in a circle.

likes being in a place well known.

hands on ears often.

is overly active, uncooperative, or resistant.

doesn't know how to play with toys.

doesn't smile when smiled at.

has poor eye contact.

gets "stuck" doing the same things over and over and can't move on to other things.

seems to prefer to play alone.

gets things for him/herself only.

is very independent for his/her age.

does things "early" compared to other children.

seems to be in his/her "own world."

seems to tune people out.

is not interested in other children.

dislikes playing pretend.

walks on his/her toes.

shows unusual attachments to toys, objects, or schedules (i.e., always holding a string or having to put socks on before pants).

spends a lot of time stacking objects, lining things up or putting things in a certain order.

unconcerned about - or completely oblivious to - dangers around him/her (i.e., standing in the middle of the street without worrying about getting hit by a car).

I hope that this might help you see a little more about how Cho was definately Autistic by what reports and interviews state.--CorpusDelecti 12:25, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe autism is even allowed on the Seung-Hui Cho page because it is unverifiable and that only select news organizations translated what his family member said as autism, if you think you can diagnose a dead guy with autism, well thats just a little humorous. And besides that I know you would like to think that the Military only takes the best of the best but the fact is they take whoever they can get, I even know recruiters who have destroyed medical records and given recruits substances to allow them to pass drug tests, when I went to MEPS my knee's cracked loud as hell as I duck walked about half the required distance and they didn't care. Abuseofpower 18:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

My mistake it says the parent told the aunt that he "may have autism" and it also says the diagnosis "could not be verified" and that "no records show such a diagnosis" hmmm Abuseofpower 18:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Speech Problem

According to various news sources, Cho's grandmother was interviewed and she was quoted as saying that Cho as a child couldn't speak well. This troubled his parents. I saw msnbc cover this on tv as well, saying he had autism.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2007/04/19/4068123.html http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/4729152.html http://wkbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=6391957

According to other sources, Professor Edward Falco quoted that Cho had a problem speaking. http://www.postchronicle.com/news/breakingnews/article_21275843.shtml

This may give insight to Cho's social absence. I can't edit anything yet, this seems worthy to mention. Secondgen 16:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

and Hitler was a sadomasochist who abused cocaine and <insert taboo here>. Can no one make the connection that violence in America is increasing? We are in dystopia. Cho's acts are merely an effect, not a cause.

We should be very careful in adding Autism or other diagnoses to the article. It seems that the autism hypothesis only based on Cho's great-aunts statement (possibly mistranslated) and a few armchair "expert" psychologists ad hoc speculations. Adding autism to the article could stigmatise a vulnerable section of society (there are 2 million Americans with an Autism Spectrum Disorder). Only a definite diagnosis should be added...soured from Cho’s medical notes ideally. But I just saw autism mentioned again on CBS News, its becoming public knowledge despite being speculation.

That said, it is significant that Martin Bryant who perpetrated the 1996 Port Arthur Massacre (35 dead), was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome (mild autism) after his arrest. In his case he didn’t commit suicide, psychologists had someone to examine; "Although this diagnosis does not directly explain his violence it is thought the isolation Bryant experienced as a result of the Asperger's may have been a contributing factor." Diamonddavej 00:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

selective mutism (not autism)

Besides autism, there are several possible explanations for Cho's reported social and speech deficits. It is incorrect to label him "autistic" based on what his elderly Korean aunt said in an interview (she met him only twice). On his confession video, Cho's speech cadences seem like those of a neurotypical American, and he does not show any obvious signs of organic autism.

Is it possible that Cho's extreme shyness as a child, his social isolation, or (perhaps) an underlying psychosis induced behaviors that looked like autism? In fact, Cho's childhood behaviors are highly consistent with selective mutism, an anxiety disorder first identified in the 1980s that is easily misdiagnosed as autism (and which sometimes connects to psychosis). Currently there is no indication of an autism diagnosis from the Cho family in the US, nor from US school officials and classmates. Organic autism is highly inconsistent with many of Cho's known developmental milestones. —Sandover 03:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

The spectrum of autistic disorders is wide. Authorities believe autism can manifest itself very mildly, in the form of disorders such as Asperger's Syndrome, for example. It could be that Cho was born with such a disorder, and the horrific stress of growing up with it untreated may have contributed to his obvious mental illness.

Cho may easily have had some other kind of organic learning disability that caused his speech and communication problems. Who knows.

He also shows possible signs of narcissistic personality disorder which, ultimately, burgeoned into a psychosis. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kenmore (talk • contribs) 15:22, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for that, it sounds like a possibility. However, I read a post on a support group website last year, a young autistic woman said she had stopped talking 3 years ago because of bullying over her odd sounding voice and now used a computerised voice to communicate. And also, have a look at look at Cho's photograph of the bullets he precisely arranged[1] and compare them with an autistic child’s neatly arranged toys[2]; Autistic people are very obsessive and often arrange collections of items in neat rows. Also, Cho displayed a terrible lack of social skills, he didn't understand the feelings of the women he stalked or the emotional effect of his violent hate filled essays/plays on his class (at one stage 90% of the class were too scared to attend one of his essay readings). Autism is Latin for self- the affected person can only see the world from their own point of view, they are often unaware of other people feelings. There is a whole heap of other things that indicate autism, but it would make a boring long list. Diamonddavej 05:51, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that—and please, spare me your 'long boring list' and your 'whole heap of other things' and more Latin etymological proofs, because you are obviously not someone with extensive experience in autism and developmental psychology. If you had, you would see red flags all over this notion that Cho was 'diagnosed' with 'autism', particularly given what we are now hearing about his specific childhood behaviors. (See the Los Angeles Times and, in particular, New York Times profiles of Cho over the weekend: "Relatives thought he was a mute. Or mentally ill.") Cho didn't come across as 'autistic' on his videotape. His behaviors were almost certainly not the result of typical organic autism.

For the record, simply lining up things in rows is not an indication of 'autism,' either. It could be OCD-like behavior, which occurs in the company of many other underlying conditions, including autism (and frequently with selective mutism). Also for the record, acting or appearing socially insensitive is not in itself an indicator of 'autism.' (If it were, you could diagnosis me from my opening paragraph, right?) It's interesting, and significant, that no one in Cho's family apparently makes mention of typical autistic 'stimming' behaviors during his childhood, during which Cho was described as mannerly and extremely 'well-behaved,' apparently able to walk without problem or incident, etc. Ask any parent—those descriptions of Cho just won't ring true of children with early autism or Asperger's. Note that the Cho relatives don't talk about any apparent slowness to learn how to speak, but more about his "refusal" to do so, and about his extreme "shyness"; they also mention efforts to "prod" him to talk (i.e., they know he can talk and have heard him talk, but he just won't do it). Cho's Korean grandaunt talks about Cho's mother's wish to "communicate" with him, just to speak and have conversation: "He was very quiet and only followed his mother and father around and when others called his name he just answered 'yes' or 'no' but never showed any feelings or emotions" (link). All of that taken together is, in fact, a big clue—but not to an autism diagnosis.

It's significant that no one is saying Cho had problems with passive language comprehension, either. Nor are his social gaffes those which typically vex people who have autism. (The fact of taking cellphone pictures of girls without their permission—while admittedly a social gaffe that could conceivably be committed by a person with autism or Asperger's—would not be an indicator, in itself, of autistic tendencies. If I saw a man doing that, autism wouldn't be my first, second, or even tenth guess, and it is maddening that the mass media is currently associating Cho's predatory cellphone tactics with 'autistic' behaviors.)

In addition, Cho developed at least one close friendship in elementary school in the US, where he (not incidentally) excelled academically in math and English, despite his apparent inability to engage verbally with teachers, other students, etc. Neither that one friendship, nor the academic acceleration in English, are typical of autism (spare me some lecture on Asperger's—he didn't have Asperger's, either). Instead, these are both hallmarks of selective mutism, which was first systematically described in the early 1980s, and by 1994 was classified by DSM-IV as a social anxiety disorder (Cluster C).

While it's never right to diagnose people without evaluating them firsthand, it's right in my mind to defend at least against this bad armchair diagnosis of 'autism.' Cho wasn't autistic in any ordinary sense. As for the possibility of selective mutism, unless aggressively treated, it's well-established that people with it can drift into autism or something resembling it. They can also drift into psychosis, and a childhood history of selective mutism has been linked to some notable (male) spree killers.

We don't yet really know what Cho's childhood was like. We have yet to see his medical records. We do know selective mutism is often confused with autism, and misdiagnosed as such—until you've seen it side-by-side with autism, it can be difficult to distinguish. I am sure the Cho family, just like the families and survivors of the Virginia Tech tragedy, are struggling for answers, to understand what afflicted the person they thought they knew (and how, in fact, anyone could do this). But why compound this tragedy with tragic misinformation about autism? No one—and certainly not the highly-misunderstood autistic community—deserves this mass-murderer smear. Supporters and advocates for selective mutism would never have wished an individual like Cho to be the one to bring attention to their cause. But perhaps the media can make things better from the start by explaining that the overwhelming majority of those with selective mutism are not at all violent. In fact, the vast majority of people with selective mutism are female—partly for that reason, perhaps, it's a relatively little-known disease. There are indeed effective treatments and interventions, the earlier in childhood the better.

So where did this bogus 'autism' diagnosis come from? It's all based, apparently, on what Cho's mother said over the phone to her elderly aunt during a New Year's telephone call last year. Could Cho's mother have been saving face, or searching for an excuse, or simply looking for her own bewildered explanation for her son's mysterious behaviors? Was she trying to find a reason to explain her son's absence from the family, the reason for his lack of visits to South Korea? 'Autism' is a buzzword, easily thrown around these days—perhaps autism is easier to acknowledge, in a Korean context, than the possibility (or the dread) of mental illness. For what it's worth, the detail about the grandaunt's New Year's call from Cho's mother appears in the latest Time magazine, which just like the Washington Post on its April 21st front page, made the 'autism' claim without any effort to qualify, contextualize or debunk it.

—Sandover 18:15, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for your information, I knew very little about selective mutism before you helped me out. Also you said: "you are obviously not someone with extensive experience in autism and developmental psychology." On the contrary, I think I do know something about Autism and Asperger's, I have Asperger's Syndrome (AS) myself. I’ve faced a great deal of difficulty due to AS. Thus, saying I have no experience in autism is deeply hurtful to me. Let’s try to be polite, remember no personal attacks.

If it is any consolation, I did not add any reference of autism to the article. In fact, I wrote on a past discussion page requesting its removal and stated that any mention of autism should only be made if evidence of an official diagnosis is found in Cho’s childhood medical records or peer review opinion. I still stand by that. Any mention of autism belongs of the discussion page where people can disagree with it and offer alternatives. Actually, I was looking for a good alternative to autism and you provided it.

Continuing with your statement "you are obviously not someone with extensive experience in autism and developmental psychology." Shortly after I was diagnosed, I founded in 2002 and continue to run social group for people with autism and AS. I have personally met over 100 people with varying degrees of autism, from severe autism to a university professor who has AS. Several of my friends are autistic and AS (my autistic friend didn't speak till he was 4 and rarely spoke till 10; he now doing an MSc in microbiology). I have also discussed autism with several experts in field of autism research and forensic psychology including Rita Jordan, Chris Gillberg, Michael Fitzgerald and J. Arturo Silva. In 2005 I appeared in TV documentary about how Asperger’s affects me and I have also talked on the Radio last year about Asperger’s syndrome with Michael Fitzgerald. So, yes I do think I know something about AS and autism, but of course I am happy to learn more. Diamonddavej 02:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

First off, my sincere apologies to you—I meant no offense, and obviously we're on the same side of this issue. Be proud that your comment (seemingly) ticked me off.

But if I may use your Asperger's diagnosis to make a point, it's that insider knowledge of autism (like yours) is necessarily incomplete and partial, and still prone to many possible misperceptions and generalizations. You're not a developmental specialist with an overview of the field, even if you know your own story and can be articulate about it. You are not in a position to debunk the autism myth that has quickly coalesced around Cho. The very fact that you and others with autism can recognize and verify certain coincidences and commonalities between your autism and Cho's (incomplete and partial) list of behavioral traits—the fact that you can see his awful rant and not completely dismiss his supposed 'autism' as a fiction—is what makes this autism idea about Cho particularly misleading and insidious.

But to tell you the truth, I'm not so much worried about the misperceptions within the autism community—they have a way of getting worked out. I'm worried about the people in the wider world who already have a concept of someone with autism, and who are now trying to reconcile that concept with the image of a potential mass murderer. I'm worried about people who are already saying, 'I heard about that guy who shot three people in the town next door, he might have had Asperger's, too. ' Or, 'there was an autistic guy who cornered me in a room, and I wondered if he was going to kill me. ' I think it's important that with Cho, people realize we are dealing with something very, very far from the ordinary autism experience—and probably not autism at all, but the selective mutism I've described. —Sandover 04:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

A friendly reminder: "This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject." There are more appropriate forums for discussing this elsewhere. (And perhaps Wikipedia isn't the place for original research?) Phony Saint 03:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Sandover:

I’m not so sure that a developmental disorder like Asperger’s can be ruled out, based on Cho’s reported behavior at college. His suitemates reported that his speech patterns, verbal content, and outward behaviors were bizarre, overly stilted, etc. This is soft evidence that possibly (not definitely, just possibly…) Cho’s capacity to perceive and understand interpersonal issues was impaired. The anecdotes of Cho’s behavior reported by his acquaintances sound in some ways like the symptoms described by neuropsychologist Byron Rourke, who specializes in right hemisphere brain syndromes such as non-verbal learning disorder, Asperger’s, and other similar conditions.

Cho’s academic excellence in grammar school does not automatically discount the possibility of his having some congenital neuropsychological problem, either. Such conditions can be extremely subtle and can manifest themselves in countless different outward ways, particularly in an individual of high innate intelligence.

The bottom line – if the anecdotes about his behavior are trustworthy – is that Cho was seriously disorientated socially (and in other ways, too). At the very least, the possibility of a developmental disorder cannot be discounted on the basis of a snap judgment.

As for developmental psychology, read the theories of Otto Kernberg regarding very severe personality disorders. Again, there is much food for thought here in what we so far know about Cho’s thinking and behavior. Many of the symptoms associated with "selective mutism" overlap with Kernberg's descriptions of exceptionally severe personality disorders, and of their potential in certain cases to spill over into paranoia and psychosis.

Kenmore 03:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Selective mutism doesn't rule out additional pathologies. I still believe that Asperger's is highly unlikely here (if I were being facetious, I would ask you, what's Asperger's?). Note that selective mutism itself may be genetic, and Cho's father is reportedly reclusive and antisocial himself—his was an arranged marriage (according to the New York Times on April 22), and he had to be pressured by his family to take a bride. As I've said, selective mutism can become something very like autism; however, the autism that results has a different character than organic autism. Selective mutism can also drift into the areas you're talking about, too... that said, I'm not a forensic psychiatrist, so I'll zip it up now. Sandover 04:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

This is all very interesting, but this page is not a general discussion forum - it exists to discuss improvements to the article. As this conversation is largely original research, it really isn't relevant to the article and thus really don't belong on this page. Natalie 03:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I believe that this discussion helps to improve the article in several ways. First, Cho has been described by the media -- and apparently dubiously so -- as being autistic. A decision has to be made by the editors of the article as to how Cho's alleged "autism" should be discussed. Second, there's the unescapable issue of just what was wrong with Cho mentally. In upcoming days the media will probably announce many new details regarding his past, and that will probably fuel more public commentary from experts about what Cho's pathology or disorder may have been. This discussion serves to sharpen judgment as to how that issue will handled in the main article by the wikipedia editors.

Kenmore 03:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

For 34 hours, there stood an unchallenged statement on Cho's Wikipedia page that he had been diagnosed with autism. Countless newspapers around the world published a purported fact about Cho last week, calling it an autism 'diagnosis,' without first questioning its truth value or origin. We're still waiting for a significant retraction or qualification. It's incredible that on a Monday, a weekday, no news organization has been able to unearth a shred of support for Cho's supposed autism diagnosis. Isn't that remarkable? It's a full five days now since this 'autism' story broke, and a full three days since it began to be doubted here and elsewhere: so where's the proof that any of it was true in the first place? While I agree that Wikipedia is not the place for original research, Wikipedia is the appropriate venue to defend against media facts which plainly don't check out, and which are plainly destructive. For that reason, I can't promise not to do it again. Sandover 04:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The original research is the lengthy discussion of what mental disorder he might have, which is original research and will not be admissibile in the article, assuming one could even diagnose a mental illness from media reports. I understand the need to fact check a media claim, but that doesn't require an extensive supposition on the possible mental problems of a dead man that you've never met. Natalie 13:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

That dead man I never met didn't have autism, Natalie. The world has printed it as fact when there is apparently little or no justification for it. To have an obvious lie like that in circulation, and to put an 'original research' burden on the people who are defending against it, strikes me as hypocrisy. For what it's worth, I'm not speculating about the disturbance (whatever it is) that caused him to go on his rampage. This is not a paranoia vs. psychosis vs. psychopath debate. It's about debunking a label that has already been (falsely) assigned to Cho. There's a big difference. Sandover 15:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Does that take 6 paragraphs of speculative diagnosis that you posted above? I agree with you that we should not label him as autistic, and if it is mentioned at all it should be mentioned as media speculation. But a lengthy conversation, that engages in diagnosing someone site unseen as has happened above, is unecessary and bordering on misuse of a talk page. Natalie 15:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The question of the basis of Cho's "autism" diagnosis, however, is a very, very big part of his story. I don't think the subject could be addressed on this talk page without getting into lots of "speculative diagnosis".

Kenmore 10:22, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Chris Gillberg says that autism itself is made up of sub-varieties; he speaks of autisms not autism – disorders of empathy. Autism is an utilitarian umbrella term that provides similar kinds of help and maximises benefit to as many as possible. Clearly, if we pulled apart autism to the same degree we analyse Cho, we would break autism into its sub-varieties. The war between Splitters and Lumpers is an ancient one (incidentally Fred Volkmar[3] quipped in an interview[4] with NPR that splitters tend to be Aspies due to their difficulties with weak central coherence, they fail to see the forest because they obsess over a tree). Just report that Cho's autism is just speculation, report how it the diagnosis never happened and how the media wrongly reported it (often suspicion is altered to fact after passing between people) and don't diagnose. -Diamonddavej 23:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

The Korean word for autism 자폐증 (japyejeung) is a cognate of the Chinese/Japanese term 自閉症 (zibizheng), whose Chinese characters literally just mean "self-closed-syndrome" and can be colloquially applied to anyone who is introverted or noticeably quiet. It is not a very scientifically precise term and its typical usage would be equivalent to describing someone as "depressed" (saying "I am depressed" doesn't imply I have clinical depression). Thus the statement from Cho's grandmother of Cho being "autistic" must be taken with a huge grain of salt. I agree with Sandover, I don't believe Cho was autistic. The media took a translated soundbite of "autism" and made a big deal out of it. --Naus 22:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Very interesting, thanks for that. One Korean speaker told me japyejeung is a very specific medical word, and doesn't have the generalized sense of introversion that its Chinese cognate seems to have (at least according to your description). Apparently, the word japyejeung spread widely across Korean culture just a couple years ago with a film called "Marathon", which told the story of an autistic boy who runs long-distance races. Several Korean speakers who heard Kim's interview—parents of autistic children themselves—told me she didn't seem very informed about autism, and might have picked up the word from its recent popularization. The first translated interview I saw (CNN, Anderson Cooper 360, April 19) did not use the word "autism" in English translation. Cho was said instead to have been inward or withdrawn. Yet other news organizations apparently translated the same interview (in print) and came up with the word "autism." Can anyone find the actual clip? Sandover 22:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I have a Reuters Clip of Kim Yang-Soon. I managed to download the video from the Reuters website on the 22nd April by looking at the page's HTML code (its 12 Mb). It was also on youtube for a while, until it was taken down (copyright). I tried looking for the video today on Reuters but I couldn't find it, I think its been deleted. The translator mostly downs out Kim, but I can hear some of her speech quite distinctly. I found two transcripts of the interview, they differ very slightly (two different translators).[5]and [6] The second is a longer transcript that includes some material not in the video I have, a longer version of the video.

자폐증 is Korean for autism and I'm reasonably impressed by their understanding. When I entered 자폐증 into Google several Korean autism related pages appeared; including - ABOUT AUTISM,[7] Autismcenter Korea,[8] and a Korean wiki page about autism.[9]

Also, it was not reported as much...a church pastor at Centreville Korean Presbyterian Church (Va.) said in an interview with Newsweek magazine, "I felt him a little autistic and advised his mother to take him to hospital. But she did not agree with me," "I now repent for not urging her strongly." The interview was published in print, only a short section of it is online. [10] In this case, there is no possibility of a translation error. Diamonddavej 05:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Great stuff, Dave. Reading those interviews with Kim, I'm not sure if I've misremembered something: "When I nudged him he just looked at me but didn't say a word." In fact, the early childhood section as it currently stands has Cho talking when prodded. In fact, in selective mutism, it's more usual the nudge would produce a glare but no words, just as Kim described. So I think it should be changed.

Interesting how many times Kim mentions the fact that the boy has no problems, except that he won't talk. She attributes the same observation to Cho's mother after their move to the US. "She told me she had nothing to worry but only that her son did not talk." In other words, he can talk, but he won't.

I was struck by this quote: "He would just stand up or sit down, and go to the bathroom or eat when I told him to. He just didn't talk at all." What do you think of incorporating it into the section? Or another? Sandover 05:58, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Oldboy

There isn't any real evidence that he watched "Oldboy" from the reference provided, other than that some of the photos he took are similar to some shots in the movie(holding the gun to his head, which has been seen in many other movies, and using a hammer as a weapon). It is possible that he has seen the movie some time before, but the photos are hardly enough evidence to claim that he watched it in the days leading up to the shooting. The reference just sounds like media speculation to me. Short of, say, police actually discovering the DVD among his possessions, I think we shouldn't jump to assume this. -Pravit 16:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

A laughable comparison birthed from internet forums. Secondgen 17:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The Oldboy article has a link from skynews reporting that detectives on the case are saying he watched it repeatedly. http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1261402,00.html. I am not sure how they know that, but that is what the sky news report is saying.XinJeisan 17:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I would like to know more about this too. Who are the "detectives" that this skynews claims to have interviewed.Secondgen 17:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Well he is Korean, and many Korean Americans (I myself included) are familiar with Oldboy. Mr. SmartyPants 10:44AM, 20 April 2007. (UTC)

I'm Korean American as well, I never heard of this "Oldboy." Your point? Secondgen 16:36, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

My point is that because he's a Korean American, it's highly possible that he had some sort of Influence with Oldboy. It is a film that is highly looked upon by people. I'm not saying he absolutely saw it, I'm saying it's a possibility. Mr. SmartyPants 7:50, 21 April 2007. (UTC)

Cho also had black hair. So did Hitler. It is thus possible that Cho was really inspired by Hitler! Yay for slippery slope logic!

If Cho watched Korean stuff, then it is likely then he watched Old Boy? So? I never watched the movie but all I know is that some dude was stuck in a room for about ten years... Is there anything gruesome in the movie? mirageinred 02:12, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

If he watched Korean stuff, it's rather likely he watched Oldboy. It is one of the more famous/well known Korean films in the West. Mr. SmartyPants 7:51, 21 April 2007. (UTC)

Definitely gruesome stuff in the movie. There is a scene with a hammer. It's that scene that also suggests for many viewers inspiration from side-scrolling videogames. Might be worth mentioning in the article OB is SK. Also features some sexual perversity. 74.67.42.162 02:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

"It is likely," is an OR violation and does not belong in wiki. Skynews is an unreliable source as far as I'm concerned. This is not an interpretation given by mainstream media. Secondgen 14:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Is New York Times not mainstream media either? I think Oldboy needs to be mentioned. His plays are given so much attention I find it preposterous that Oldboy isn't. Police says he had watched Oldboy repeatedly. --Naus 02:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

If police did say that then kindly provide a reference in the article, otherwise this is just uncited speculation and does not belong in an encyclopedia. Furthermore, it insinuates the notion that the movie "Old Boy" caused Cho to commit these crimes, an outrageous claim. If you claim it does not, then I can see no other purpose for it to be in the article, because then we might as well start adding things like: "Police said Cho ate Pop-tarts for breakfast." -- itistoday (Talk) 15:34, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

(reindenting) I noticed now that the picture comparisons are making the Oldboy references more blatantly OR. Also, after reading the sources in this section makes me inclined to think that these sources are OR as well. Stuff in the article like "looks like", "seems logical that", and so on. Even the title of the article:Virginia Tech killer's hammer photograph resembles the violent South Korean movie "Oldboy" sounds OR. I thought we couldn't use sources that are OR or any derivatives, even if they are reliable. UnfriendlyFire 01:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I have just removed a picture and paragraph about "Oldboy" from the article. Bueller 007 13:35, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you understand what Original Research means. OR means that we can't come up with our own theories and ideas to put on Wikipedia. However, other sources CAN as long as they are properly cited. This source, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18207904/site/newsweek/?from=rss draws the comparison. It's a valid point to bring up. I have already been through two other editors who had the same skepticism as you do, but see my talk. They both conceded that the inclusion was valid since it was indeed sourced. I must insist that the comparison remains as it is informative, and is properly cited. Malamockq 14:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd say that the Oldboy reference is pure speculation that was introduced by the media. The media brought up this reference because some purported similarity in the hammer pose. However, nothing has been definitively documented or traced that Cho actually saw the movie. Marking this one as OR, since the MSNBC article also speculates about this factor in its analysis. Unless a copy of the movie, a receipt or other evidence that points to Cho having seen the movie comes up during the investigation, I would leave it out of the article. lwalt 21:57, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

It's media speculation with a solid basis. The media correlates the two because the comparison is there. Cho didn't use a hammer in his killings, yet he posed with it in a photograph. MSNBC and other news sources then draw logical conclusions. That's the point of analyzing the contents of the media package. In any case, a original research disclaimer can't be put up because it's not original research. It is indeed properly sourced. Malamockq 22:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Recent Changes in behaviour prior to mass killing

In recent weeks his routine had changed. His roommates say he went to the campus gym at night, lifting weights to bulk up He went for a haircut — surprising them by coming back to the room with a military-style buzz cut. Students say he seemed as quiet as ever in the days before Monday's rampage. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cho_Seung-hui)

Relationship problem

According to "early reports", it seems he was obssessed with a classmate Emily Hilscher and was furious after his romantic advances were denied. (Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cho_Seung-hui) (thought ): Being a lonely individual(see below for description on it), it would appear that he actually reached out to one girl in hopes of love

I can't add this because I'm not registered, but this article (href="http://abcnews.go.com/US/VATech/story?id=3071730&page=2") states that there are email records that Cho and Emily Hilscher were at least acquainted. This is contrary to this wiki article suggesting that Cho and Emily had never met.68.42.17.202 01:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Personality characteristics

Personality characteristics : lonely(by choice), did not talk much(quiet)-- (refused to participate in class even when called upon, refused to respond to people even with greeted.), "meanness" "arrogant","obnoxious","intelligent man" (Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cho_Seung-hui)

Parents

Remarks that parents were not identified or spoken to press were also removed, why a ban on this observation? One report of a Korean association spokesman says he is familiar with people who know the parents, who were under distress. Does anyone know why the press has chosen not to identify the parents?

Its not the press. The family is under protection by law. See this.

Behaviour in elementary school?

Is there any source that has reported on how Cho acted in elementary school? There's a curious time gap between the accounts of him as a young child and as a high school student. —Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-22 13:02Z

Virginia Tech special team for Seung Hui

I read somewhere Vriginia Tech had special team for Seung Hi, and they had regular meetings too.

What was the activity of the special team?

Anybody know?

I read there is a special team of administrators, health professionals, and law enforcement people who meet regularly at Tech on any number of topics, which could have included Cho. Also not in the public sphere are Cho's experiences with the mental health professionals on campus and through his court-ordered counseling.69.255.0.91 23:23, 22 April 2007 (UTC

What's the evidence that Cho was autistic?

Does anyone know if any official documentation is alleged -- from sources aside from the family -- regarding the possibility that Cho was mildly autistic? Usually a diagnosis of this sort would be documented by professionals, at school or elsewhere.

Apparently there is no written record of such diagnosis. The claim that he might be autistic was made by his family. So is it a medical diagnosis or just a figure of speech? --128.135.96.228 14:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Autism is a medical diagnosis. If Cho were at all autistic, he would probably have been only mildly so, possibly fitting the description of something like Asperger's Syndrome. That Cho may have had an autistic disorder would go far in explaining his disorientation. If indeed Cho was in any way autistic, then possibly the stress of coping with his disability throughout childhood and adolesence would explain how he developed mental illness.

But the article on Cho suggests that he may never have been diagnosed with autism in the first place. Possibly Cho's parents only told relatives that their disturbed child was autistic in order to protect themselves against the more severe stigma in Korean culture against mental illness proper (i.e., not autism).

I think your last paragraph is right on. If a medical diagnosis was made, there should be a record of it. But there is none. It seems like it was just something the parents said, as sort of an adjective. Like describing someone as depressed (which doesn't mean that person is diagnosed as clinically depressed). --Naus 01:35, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I believe there should be a separate section detailing the Cho/autism controversy. It should explain that he never recieved a medical diagnosis as a child and that the "diagnosis" is only based on the subjective opinion of two elderly relatives and a church pastor. Diamonddavej 03:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree, I think we're moving toward a separate section on the autism controversy. It would be helpful if the media would document the issue. After all, they ran hundreds of stories trumpeting Cho's "autism," and frequently even used the misleading phrase "diagnosed with autism" (the British press was particularly bad about this). What a disservice that the media have not yet picked up on the serious doubts about this supposed diagnosis, nor on the horrified disbelief from the autism community. We apparently know there aren't "records" of his "autism," though there's a hint of medical records (if not school records) suggesting a different diagnosis or mental health assessment.

As for Cho's decorum in the classroom, why aren't reporters talking to classmates or interviewing high school teachers? Or maybe they just all knew he "wouldn't talk" (as they said in the immediate coverage), and left it at that? We on Wikipedia ought to reexamine those eyewitness statements. At Virginia Tech, he was called the "question mark man." His classroom behavior has been been variously described as cellphone stalking (in recent years), and as a low, gutteral, forced voice when he was told he would fail a class unless he spoke (in high school). These various eyewitnesses ought to be re-interviewed, and asked more specifically about Cho's behaviors and how he generally comported himself. If any story cried out for a correction, it's this one. Sandover 14:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, regarding the alleged stalking incidents in 2005, does anyone know the details? Was Cho really stalking female students or did he merely unsettle them with disoriented, bizarre attempts to make their acquaintance (i.e., not a sustained pattern of pursuing or harassing them)?

The later was the case, it seems it was poor social skills not maliciousness. It is also important in detailing his downfall into mental illness.

In November and December 2005, college authorities received two separate complaints from two female students about "annoying" phone calls and text messages that they received from Cho. [11]

The first incident happened in November 2005, a few weird text messages to a girl. She didn't want to make a formal complaint and she characterised the texts as annoying not stalking. Cho was verbally warned by police and he immediately stopped his behaviour.

Then on the 13 December 2005, a second complaint was made. Cho texted and rang another girl, who also viewed the contact as annoying not stalking. Again, police verbally warned him and once again, he immediately stopped contacting the girl. Later that same day, the police were called back to his dorm. His roommate became concerned that Cho was suicidal. His parents also arrived at VT that day (Where they told about his "stalking" and told to go to VT or was it a coincidence? How far away do they live from VT?). Cho was taken voluntarily to Access, a state-sponsored mental health facility. He was released two days later.

Social rejection is a common trigger of depression and worse in Asperger’s Syndrome; and other socially isolating disorders.[12] Ted Kaczynski dated a woman 3 times in 1978-79, then she dumped him.[13] Ted took up his new life in the woods and developed an interest in bomb making.

Have a look at this youtube video, women with AS explains the difficulties she faces due to her AS. Diamonddavej 04:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bccw0jVovKw

Is "Name" section necessary?

I understand a lot of people have put a lot of hard work into determining that "Seung-Hui Cho" is the proper way to present his name (instead of "Cho Seung-Hui") but now that it's sorted out, does that section really need to exist in the article? Ultimately nobody will care there was some initial confusion about how to print his name. 71.121.135.67 07:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think its necessary. But, that's one opinion and my POV. The naming custom of people from a particular country is really out of scope for this article. lwalt 13:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Agree with you 100% on this Lwalt (on this and some comments you made below). I'm all for the deletion of this section, as well as the psychological speculation on the page. Bueller 007 15:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Disagree, for now, at least. Give it a month or so for people to get used to this order of names. (I still have a kneejerk reaction of "it's backwards!" when I see the given-name-first order.) After that, maybe get rid of it. We probably could trim it down quite a bit, though. Rdfox 76 10:54, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Important Factoid Missing

There is a central piece of information which should be added at the top, in fact it should probably be the third sentence of the article: It was the deadliest mass shooting by an individual in United States history. References abound. Would one of the Wiki experts be good enough to add something along those lines? 71.121.135.67 08:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Nobody else thinks this should be mentioned right up at the top?? I thought it was a no-brainer. What's the single-most important fact about Seung-Hui Cho from a historical perspective? It's that he is the individual who committed the largest mass-shooting in US history. Thoughts? 71.121.135.67 05:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Information about childhood

The WaPo did a little more digging into Cho's childhood. A picture of Cho in middle school is also featured in the article. Someone had apparently copied sent and this picture to the The Washington Post from his/her yearbook or WaPo researched the yearbook to find the picture. According to the article, neither Cho's picture nor name appeared in his high school yearbook.

Cho, D. & Gardner, A. (2007, April 24). [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/20/AR2007042002366.html An isolated boy in a world of strangers: Cho's behavior alarmed some who knew him; family 'humbled by this darkness.'] The Washington Post. Retrieved on April 24, 2007.lwalt 13:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Was there any connection to news articles about the Bridge at No Gun Ri?

Was there any information that the murderer was affected by news coverage of the massacre at No Gun Ri in Korea? At just about the exact time the murderer started preparing his video statement, there was coverage in the news of American killing of civilian refugees at No Gun Ri in Korea during the Korean War. The coverage in the news was of a memorandum that indicated that shooting civilians was a matter of policy by the U.S. Government. The murderer was a Korean national. The murderer in his statement adverts to a wrong to his "brothers and sisters." No news article has discussed the possible connection. It seems like a logical avenue of speculation, but has received absolutely no notice.64.4.228.175 15:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)AKDan

Speculation has no place on Wikipedia, especially when no news article discusses it. Phony Saint 15:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The temporal proximity of the publication of stories on No Gun Ri to the acts of the murderer is not speculation. There are two-hundred-some stories about No Gun Ri on Google. This is the discussion page,72.35.105.8 22:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)AKDan

No reliable news article has mentioned any connection between the two events, thus it is not notable, and putting it into the article would be speculation. Phony Saint 22:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Mental Health and Firearms Legal Issues

The previous section on VA and federal gun law issues substantially misrepresented the New York Times article. The NYT piece says in effect that under federal law, a person is ineligible to purchase a firearm if he or she has been "adjudicated as a mental defective" (or involuntarily committed for treatment). Cho was clearly not involuntarily committed for treatment.

There seems to be some doubt whether the magistrate's order constitutes a finding that Cho had been "adjudicated as a mental defective" since - as the piece points out - VA and federal law do not mesh. One of the agenda-driven academics cited in the NYT seem to think that this was the case, but the other interviewee does not say that, nor does the NYT itself pronounce on this issue. Further, the NYT does NOT say that reporting of mental health to the federal database is mandatory as a matter of law. Rewritten accordingly. WikiFlier 17:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Seung-Hui Cho is a Category:Virginia Tech alumni

An alumnus (pl. alumni) according to the American Heritage Dictionary is "a male graduate or former student of a school, college, or university." In addition, an alumna (pl. alumnae) is "a woman graduate or former student of a school, college, or university." Bnguyen 18:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

This seems to be the subject of a sort of indirect edit war. Strictly speaking, he does meet the criteria of "alumnus" by virtue of his being a former student at Virginia Tech. I'm not necessarily in support of its inclusion, but the rationale for its exclusion needs to be something other than "He did not graduate", as is currently the case with Phydend's edit. -Etafly 19:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

• Well based on the American Heritage Dictionary [14] & Wikipedia definition on alumnus a former student is a alumni. It is simply black and white and rational for it to be included, eventhough of his actions at Virginia Tech (WHICH I DO NOT CONDONE) he should be catagorized properly as a alumbus as described by the dictionary and wikipedia definition.

An example look at wikipedia biography of Ted Bundy was a graduate of University of Washington and is listed in the category as an alumni.Bnguyen 05:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry if I started an indirecdt edit war, I definitely didn't want to do that. I should have looked at the definition more closely as he is obviously a former student so should be in the category. Phydend 14:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem. Apologies if I implied that you were the one who began it -- it has been ongoing, yours was simply the most recent reversion at the time. -Etafly 16:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Cho hired an escort named Chastity Frye one month before rampage

Cho Hired an Escort Before Rampage: http://abcnews.go.com/US/VATech/story?id=3071730&page=1 One wonders if had she performed "full service," this whole tragedy could have been averted. Ah.

• Please try to refrain from speculative gossip. I'm not deleting this because the story might eventually find its way into the body of the article, though I'd question its encyclopedic merit. -Etafly 21:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

"Some classmates worried that he had a "hit list" of other students he wanted to kill."

^ that sounds like something that would be speculated and exaggerated after the event. perhaps there was someone who said that, but most likely it was exaggerated to get publicity. kinda like how, when ever someone young dies or someone dies in an unusual way, all of the distant friends and friends of friends of that person suddenly claim that "their best friend died."

but i could be wrong

I think this reference from abcnews should be included in Section 2.2, Relationship with Students, because that section mentions his failed attempts to meet girls and the so-called stalking incidents. The piece from abcnews is good enough at this time to merit a reference in that section. (Just like the comment elsewhere in the article, "although he had told others he was a business major" was deemed worthy of inclusion because it supposedly shows his state of mind and demeanor leading up to the shooting.) (Although personally, I think the business major part shouldn't be there.) This escort reference seems to support the failed relationship angle and his social clumsiness. All in my opinion. 71.121.135.67 05:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

More on that: here is another article which has some interesting quotes on the topic: "'It would be very odd now to find a serial murderer who is not fueled by pornography. Law enforcement records confirm that,' Reisman continued, adding that hundreds of such cases were alone documented by Vernon J. Geberth, Former Commander, NYPD, Bronx Homicide. 'In our current erototoxic environment certainly rapists, child molesters, thrill killers are fueled by pornography,' said Reisman. 'I would guarantee that a serious investigation would locate pornography among almost all if not all kid killers and serial killers.' According to Reisman, pornography is a common factor shared by mass murdering students in US schools." http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/apr/07042406.html 71.121.135.67 05:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Stop with these nuts blaming everything around us. Millions of people watch pornography and use escort service or pay hookers, yet it doesn't turn them into psycho killers. If anything, it could help them.--Svetovid 10:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Svetovid, nobody is blaming an escort service for turning him into a mass killer. The point is that his social isolation is reflected not just in his clumsy attempts in chasing female students, but also in his awkward use of the escort service as detailed in the article. In fact all of the documented idiosyncrasies in his behavior (writing on walls; violent plays; stalking; shunning roommates; escort services) should be included in the article because the article is about him as a person. When I suggest the above reference should be cited, it's not to blame his behavior on an outside influence, it's simply to show what he, the subject of this article, is all about. If it turns out he was addicted to collecting jelly beans, that should be included too, not as a way to blame jelly beans for what he did, but because this article is about Seung-Hui Cho. 71.121.135.67 10:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I think you will find that the shunning was the other way around. People stopped talking to Cho because of his odd behaviour, including clumsy attempts at overcoming his social isolation. After his first "stalking" case in Nov 2005 and particularly on the 13th Dec, people ignored him en masse. Only then did Cho’s essays and plays start to get violent, isolating him further. He didn’t realise he was pushing people away, because he was a socials illiterate. He was seen as odd but harmless before Nov 2005, and gave no trouble at all. I think it was a stupid feed back loop. The article's motive section should detail the timeline of his downfall, and without blame, it should illustrate the mechanism of this feed back loop. The escort was Cho's last attempt at being "normal", he failed. Some prostitutes provide a specialised service to people with mental and physical disabilities and in Holland, mind bogglingly, the disabled are allowed a prostitute paid by the State.[15] -Diamonddavej 22:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

• OR is bad. Especially when it causes the occasional wikipedian to saw a limb off and move to Holland. I know I just considered it. -Etafly 23:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Movement Reworking of autism statement

Leaving the question of whether or not Cho actually had autism aside, where should the statement made by Cho's grandaunt go? If she was told by Cho's parents only a year ago about him supposedly having autism, it certainly doesn't belong in "Behavior as a young child." Putting it under "official psychiatric evaluation" would make it sound like an actual diagnosis; perhaps the section could be renamed to include both the official evaluation and the call? Phony Saint 23:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

No, Cho was first suspected to be autistic at 8 years old by Kim Yang-Soon (the sister of Cho's grandfather) just before he moved to the US in 1992. So it should remain in the childhood development section, with the necessary admonishment that it is just opinion. There was also a church pastor who suspected Cho to be autistic and asked his mother to bring him to a Hospital.[16] I don't know how old Cho was at that time; the interview was printed in Newsweek, only a short section of it is online.

I found the transcript of the Reuters Video interview with Kim Yang-Soon.[17] The autism controversy originated from her interview. By looking at HTML source code I was able to download the video from Reuters; I have a copy. I just went back to the Reuters website, the video was since deleted. Kim discusses meeting Cho when he was 8 year old, just before he moved to the US.

85-YEAR-OLD KIM YANG-SOON, CHO'S GREAT AUNT, SAYING: "He would just stand up or sit down, and go to the bathroom or eat when I told him to. He just didn't talk at all."

(SOUNDBITE) (Korean) 85-YEAR-OLD KIM YANG-SOON, CHO'S GREAT AUNT, SAYING: "He was a fine looking boy, but he didn't talk. When I nudged Him (she makes a poking action with her right arm), he just looked at me, but didn't say a word. I thought he was an autistic child."

Kim added she heard from Cho's mother later that the he was diagnosed as being autistic after Cho went to the United States, but this had not been officially confirmed.(see below)

10. (SOUNDBITE) (Korean) 85-YEAR-OLD KIM YANG-SOON, CHO'S GREAT AUNT, SAYING "After the family moved to the U.S., the mother was always worried that the boy was too quiet. She told me she had nothing to worry but only that her son did not talk."

And there is that one other source relating to Cho's alleged autism, the interview with a church Pastor at Centreville (Va.) Korean Presbyterian Church, published in Newsweek magazine.[18] He said, "I felt him a little autistic and advised his mother to take him to hospital. But she did not agree with me," he tells Newsweek. "I now repent for not urging her strongly." (Instead, she prayed for a cure).

Perhaps Kim Yang-soon misunderstood Cho’s mother; Cho was only suspected as autistic by a church pastor and was not diagnosed by a doctor or she said he was diagnosed to allay her aunts worries. There is no record of an official diagnosis, which should have come to light by now. Diamonddavej 02:54, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

See Naus's comment at the bottom of Talk:Seung-Hui Cho#selective mutism (not autism) about possible interpretations of the grandaunt's statement. But that aside, I'm not concerned about the general statements by Cho's relatives that he seemed odd while living in Korea, but by the specific call stated to have happened last year, in which his parents said he was diagnosed autistic. That statement is out of place in childhood development. Phony Saint 03:24, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

As I've stated before, Kim's description of Cho's behavior at age 8 is highly consistent with selective mutism, and inconsistent with autism/Asperger's. The word japyejeung (autism) is a relatively new term in the Korean popular lexicon. She says she only heard about japyejeung (she didn't say a diagnosis, only japyejeung) in her last New Year's call. For what it's worth, I have never read an interview translation in which she said he was 'diagnosed' with japyejeung, and from what I gather from native Korean speakers, she doesn't demonstrate significant familiarity with medical jargon.

I think she's offering up her own armchair japyejeung diagnosis, trying to fit the behavioral pieces she knows together...but I think she's drawn the wrong conclusion from them. The fact that Cho wouldn't speak to her (she prodded him, and he glared), but would obey her commands to get up, sit down, go into the other room, etc., seems uncharacteristic of an autistic child's first or second encounter with a new relative. She called him "well-behaved" in another interview. Does any of this sound like an autistic child in a new environment, meeting a stranger? Absolutely not. But all of this is consistent with selective mutism behavior, and as I've said, selective mutism is frequently mistaken for autism. Thanks for finding this transcript, very helpful. Sandover 05:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Sigh... I don't really care whether or not Cho's grandaunt is telling the truth, but I do care that the statement doesn't fit in its current loacation. Phony Saint 14:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Just so you know, I don't doubt anyone is telling the truth. There's so much that is lost in translation. Sandover 14:45, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

The statement regarding Cho’s grandaunt’s conversation with Cho’s mother should stay in the childhood development section. Cho's grandaunt said that she heard from Cho's mother, on the telephone, that Cho was diagnosed with autism after he arrived in the US. Media outlets assume that the diagnosis (and phone call) occurred immediately after arriving in the US, 1992-93. I think we have been confused by misinformation. The reference to a New Years telephone conversation should be removed unless evidence is given of its timing.

Certainly, no media outlet spoke of a mystery New Years telephone call last year. Also, Koreans follow the Chinese Lunar calendar, New Years was on January 29th 2006. There was no specification of a Korean or Western New Year, which leads me to doubt the veracity of the claim.

Kim added she heard from Cho's mother later that the he was diagnosed as being autistic after Cho went to the United States, but this had not been officially confirmed. – Reuters[19]

Diamonddavej 19:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd assumed the details of the call were from the source cited, but checking it doesn't show any chronological details. I'd just go for removing the reference to the date and leave the autism statement attributed to the grandaunt. Phony Saint 20:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Writer category?

I'm tempted to removed Category:South Korean writers. Yes, he wrote plays and stories but they were for an educational assignment. Nothing was every published (I don't think, at least not before death) so I don't think the "Writers" category is appropriate. I'm sure everybody wrote stories while in school and/or college so should be applies this category to every biographical article? If anybody disagrees, please explain to rationale as I am curious. If no objects, I will remove it.↔NMajdan•talk 16:07, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Writers typically refers to people who write for a living. Go ahead and remove it. Phony Saint 16:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, they were removed but added back in due to an unrelated revert. So I removed them again. Phony Saint 16:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Then there are cases like Van Gogh. Is a person who paints a painter if he makes little or no money from his paintings? Henry Adams, is definitely listed as a writer, but did he ever earn any money from his writing? Some people paint paintings for an academic class and later end up selling those paintings but does this mean that those paintings were not done by a "painter" since the original intent was as a class assignment? W.C. 16:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

By "for a living," I meant occupation (which doesn't necessitate making money.) Regardless, it's not something Cho is known as. Phony Saint 16:50, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

What is with this silly attempt to immortalize this monster by adding him to a couple lists of writers? He is nowhere on par with the likes of JRR Tolkien. All he did was school assignments and the teachers said they were terrible. He did not make a living out of it. His manifesto were ramblings of a mad man with emotional baggage. He is not known for his writing but for his murders. His writings have no influence or merit by themselves. I don't like arguments WC is making or maybe I'll just add my name to the list of writers since I am doing some of my own writing and I'll add my name to the list of painters since I do paintings as well. Whew. I just checked and Cho has been taken off the writers categories. Thank goodness.Azn Clayjar 18:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Cho's imaginary friends - Jelly and Spanky

Who else thinks that Cho's imaginary friends, Jelly and Spanky, were his euphemism for masturbation? "I'm in here with my girlfriend and we're making out."[20][21] Cho said that Jelly and Spanky were imaginary, he knew they didn't exist. Nevertheless, his imaginary friends have been used by some to indicate that Cho was suffering from a delusion, including some qualified psychologists. Cho would have been deluded if he said, "I have a super model girlfriend called Jelly, you like to meet her?" I added to the article that Jelly and Spanky were not an indication of a delusional belief and it might have been Cho's euphemism for masturbation. Is this ok? -Diamonddavej 00:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

No, that's original research. Phony Saint 00:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)