Snap, Crackle, and Popular Culture

 Although I have only met Kyle once or twice, I can tell you first hand that this individual is not a psychopathic serial killer, nor a sociopath as he would like most of us to believe. The first time I met Kyle was in the upstairs of his luxury Misner Park apartment, paid for exclusively by his parents. I remember walking in, and seeing the inside of this luxury rental unit completely abused. The furniture was absent, and I believe that was because he was moving out the next day. His belongings were in garbage bags, and his mattress was on the floor. The walls had gone through a collage of punk rock flyers, crayon experimentation, and acts of senseless violence. None of this mattered to Kyle because the next day he was on his way to one of America’s elite art schools.

The only thing that makes Kyle different than most of us is the amount of opportunity that his parents can afford to provide for him. Behind the tattoos, Mohawk, tattered clothing, and gutter-punk guise lies a silver spoon. And while the allegations may or may not be true that he recently stabbed someone to death, there lies a difference in his killing, if he killed, and that of what we would describe as an ordinary killer.

You see- genuine killers don’t obsess over the life and history of other killers, they simply kill for genuine reasons. I would define “genuine reasons” to include the authentic qualities like sociopathic tendencies as described by the DSM-IV, vengeance, or common misconceptions about the nature and quality of life. Bundy didn’t kill because he thought Manson* was Cool. Dahmer didn’t kill because he had a thing for Lizzy Borden, he killed because he liked the way it tasted.

According to news reports and Kyle’s Myspace page, he likes violence. In my opinion, it’s not because he really likes violence, but rather because of how he perceives others will view him if he likes violence. This statement is evident due to the pride he takes in posting pictures of 9-11 attacks, columbine cc-tv footage, head shots of famous serial killers, and anti-police rhetoric.

Kyle, I am sure, would like to describe himself as a “domestic terrorist”, and the only reason he probably hasn’t is because I came up with the term before him.  Additional items found on his Myspace page includes the cover-shot of Anton Lavey’s Satanic bible, quite possibly one of the most famous pieces of secular literature that underappreciated youth believe to be religiously dogmatic, and Andrew Macdonald’s The Turner Diaries- a book about ridding the world of anything not white. But, if Kyle were truly a fan of Mcdonald, he probably would advertise Mcdonald’s other book Hunter, which I will admit in the face of my Judaism, was horrifically well written. The only reason he claims to have liked The Turner Diaries is because it was made famous after being acclaimed for creating the blueprints for the Oaklahoma city bombing.

Everything about Kyle, with the exception of his art, is not authentic. I say that because, Kyle, in every sense of the word, is a reactionary. In almost every aspect of his life, he is hiding from the popular- but at the same time, he has pushed his limits, and made a vision of himself which he believed was so anti-cool, that he became cool. The problem was that even this was unauthentic because his intent was to get cool by being uncool. Point-blank, it’s cool to be un-cool and like the things Kyle did. Get my drift?

From what I understand, Kyle was homeless for the past year- and contrary to the life of other bindlestiffs, Kyle, because of his parents alleged mass amounts of wealth, could afford to be homeless.

I have seen Kyle’s art, and as much as I don’t believe in the misconception of art- I am willing to admit that Mr. Morgan has some real talent. His art is good. But, at the same time, I wonder if the reason why his art is good is because he makes “good art” from what he beliefs about how art should be good. And if this is true, well then, it’s probably not art.

After speaking to a good friend of mine, a mutual friend of Kyle’s, she has led me to believe that his team of lawyers are going to use the infamous insanity defense. Although she didn’t tell me explicitly, it would behoove his lawyers to determine if the jurisdiction that is trying Kyle accepts voluntary intoxication as a defense because in my un-matured legal opinion, Kyle is going to fail every aspect of every insanity test. I have included below a summary of the insanity tests compiled from my notes and their application as used as an affirmative defense.

Insanity Definitions

1. Federal Test- It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution under any Federal statute that, at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the defendant, as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, was unable to appreciate the nature and quality or the wrongfulness of his acts. Mental disease or defect does not otherwise constitute a defense. (Kyle Bragged about death, he absolutely understood the nature of his acts.)

2. M’Naghten Test- To establish a defense on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing or, if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong. (This too will be hard for his counsel to prove.)

3. Model Penal Code Test- a person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality [wrongfulness] of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law.

                As used in this article, the terms “mental disease or defect” do not include an abnormality manifested only be repeated criminal or otherwise anti-social conduct.

4. Irresistible Impulse Test- The degree of insanity which will relieve the accused of the consequences of a criminal act must be such as to create in his mind an uncontrollable impulse to commit the offense charged. This impulse must be such as to override the reason and judgment and obliterate the sense of right and wrong to the extent that the accused is deprived of the power to choose between right and wrong. There mere ability to distinguish right from wrong is no longer the correct test either in civil or criminal cases, where the defense of insanity is interposed… The accused must be capable, not only of distinguishing between right and wrong, but that he was not impelled to do the act be an irresistible impulse, which means before it will justify a verdict of acquittal that his reasoning powers were so far dethroned by his diseased mental condition as to deprive him of the will power to resist the insane impulse to perpetrate the deed, though knowing it to be wrong.

5. Durham test- an accused is not criminally responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental disease or mental defect.

 So, after running down two people on the sidewalks of Tennessee out of fear that he might be caught for an alleged murder, you can see why Mr. Morgan Jr. is in such a pickle. If however, I were his parents, instead of hiring two law firms, I would start contemplating civil defenses for vicarious liability for wrongful death, Intentional and Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress,  negligence, etc…

To read the official story please click here.

*Manson was never actually found to have murdered anyone and as such might not be classified as a murderer.