Skip

Suicide ain't so painless when it brings so many changes
January 27, 2005 2:19 AM   Subscribe

When is suicide selfish? Yesterday in Los Angeles a suicidal local man stabbed himself in the chest, slit his wrists, and drove his car up onto train tracks, lost his nerve and hopped out at the last minute, to watch in anguish as not one but two trains collided with his car and with each other, killing 11 people (so far) and injuring almost 200 others. [more inside]
posted by LondonYank (100 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

 
Back in November last year, a vehicle parked on a rail crossing in Berkshire, outside London, caused another fatal crash (7 dead this time) and there are still questions as to whether the driver of the vehicle intended to commit suicide. If he did intend this, this time the attempt was successful.

In the UK alone, 200 people a year take their lives on the railways and subway lines, endangering the safety of passengers, traumatizing drivers and witnesses, and delaying untold thousands of other passengers.

While we must acknowledge the inherent tragedy of a person deciding to take their own life, is it beyond the pale to suggest that there be an etiquette to suicide? What's wrong with a more "dignified" death, such as an overdose of sleeping pills, that minimizes the impact on the rest of the world. If you're going to take your own life, isn't it the height of selfishness to take others with you?
posted by LondonYank at 2:19 AM on January 27, 2005


Well, it seems to me that suicide is almost always selfish, but this is a tragic situation no matter how you look at it. The article mentions prior drug arrests, so perhaps this was a factor in the bizarre method chosen?
posted by dg at 2:28 AM on January 27, 2005


Plus, he has now been arrested for murder.
posted by dg at 2:29 AM on January 27, 2005


Londonyank: I was held up for an hour last Sunday evening by someone who had killed themselves on the line outside Southampton. Some of my fellow passengers were seething with anger at this (unseen) dead person for delaying them. Selfish, yes, but also a damning insight into human nature.
posted by scaryduck at 2:33 AM on January 27, 2005


Well LondonYank, if we didn't stigmatize people who felt suicidal, and as a society act terrified of aging and death, people would use less risky and public methods than train tracks, jumping off buildings, etc. Try finding a good, clean, risk-less way to kill yourself- go on, try. It's not by any means easy. It's extremely, extremely difficult! The body doesn't want to die, and any method with a high probability of success also has an unfortunate chance that survival will leave the person far worse off than before- severely maimed or even brain damaged.

I don't blame this man for the accident; he probably thought, like many might, that the train would just tear through his car without pausing, like it was wet tissue paper. No reason to believe he was intending to take others with him, and calling him selfish isn't exactly helping to create this "etiquette" of which you speak.
posted by hincandenza at 2:40 AM on January 27, 2005


ScaryDuck, I've seen much the same thing before when Tube passengers have been delayed by a "person under a train". It's not a good reflection on us when we are cross at someone inconveniencing us by killing themselves and getting in our way, but it's somewhat understandable.
posted by LondonYank at 2:40 AM on January 27, 2005


When is suicide selfish?

Nearly always, practically by definition. But it's sometimes justifiable to act selfishly. This is not one of those times.

I don't have too much more to add other than to say that I love how this post was composed (kudos, LondonYank). I hope it draws a discussion, because I look forward to reading it.
posted by painquale at 2:45 AM on January 27, 2005


I believe that most attempted suicides are "merely" desperate cries for help, or more cynically, selfish mind games played on those involved in the perperator's life. If someone really wanted to die, they'd shoot themselves in the head or something similar.

It would be nice if we could address whatever obstacles exist in society that make it difficult for a person to get help when they really need it. It's hard to put words to it, but I think to a lot of people, attempting suicide allows them to express their despair without coming across as weak. So it would be great if we could get the message out that it's OK to be weak sometimes.

Especially in light of disasters like this, which make it very hard to feel any sympathy for the would-be suicide victim. Indeed, my gut reaction is incredible spite for the man. (sigh)
posted by Bokononist at 2:50 AM on January 27, 2005


Great thread title, too!
posted by painquale at 2:53 AM on January 27, 2005


Thanks, painquale, I'm mostly a lurker and as this is only my 2nd FPP I wanted to make sure it was a decent one.

hincandenza, you make an interesting point about the stigma attached to death and to suicide, but how far are you willing to go to excuse someone who causes so much pain by his actions, however justifiable?
posted by LondonYank at 2:58 AM on January 27, 2005


Dudes gonna wish he stayed in the car if he ever goes to prison...
posted by PenDevil at 3:13 AM on January 27, 2005


In Japan the disruption of trains due to suicide is a big problem. To deter would-be jumpers, railway companies have a policy of charging their families the cost of cleanup, which can run to over 20 million yen ($200,000 US).

Many stations also have mirrors opposite the platform, which is supposed to make jumpers think objectively for a second before they do it.

But still they jump!
posted by dydecker at 3:14 AM on January 27, 2005


The very phrase 'to commit suicide' carries an inherent connotation that a crime (or a sin) is being perpetrated. As palinquale put it, voluntary death is an almost inherently selfish act, but one should be allowed, I think, to act selfishly, provided one is not so inconsiderate as to put others in immediate danger by so doing. Cases such as this one in Los Angeles are just about as deplorable, in my view, as those murder-suicides one hears about from time to time, where a head-of-the-household kills his family and then himself.
posted by misteraitch at 3:15 AM on January 27, 2005


Try finding a good, clean, risk-less way to kill yourself- go on, try. It's not by any means easy.
I would have thought that the classic overdose of sleeping pills would be the way to go, because the body is sent to sleep and, therefore, has no chance to act in self-preservation. At least, that is the way I would do it if I was of a mind to. Quiet, peaceful, not too messy and the maximum of dignity with the smallest chance of being intercepted.

misteraitch, those murder-suicide scenarios are about the most selfish thing I have ever seen and I would hate to look inside the mind of someone who is contemplating something like that.
posted by dg at 3:19 AM on January 27, 2005


Always.
posted by majcher at 3:29 AM on January 27, 2005


If he has been arrested for murder, do you think he's under suicide watch now? The results of what he caused can't be good if he was suicidal in the first place.

This is just a sad story all the way around.
posted by gminks at 3:34 AM on January 27, 2005


I've also heard of people jumping from high story windows and landing on others.

If you're going to do it, make damn sure you don't take anyone else with you.
posted by orange swan at 3:53 AM on January 27, 2005


If you're going to do it, make damn sure you don't take anyone else with you.

The problem with that statement is that it implies the person committing suicide is thinking rationally enough to take the lives or concerns of others into account. In many cases, they're either just not, or they're so far gone they're no longer capable of it.
posted by abiku at 4:23 AM on January 27, 2005


meh, expecting a person who is suicidal to act reasonably and use common sense is ... well, absurd. To ask that they comply with some rules of "etiquette" isn't possible considering the mind set of the severely depressed person, they are mentally ill and incapable of making sane, reasoned decisions.
posted by squeak at 4:26 AM on January 27, 2005


perhaps the best thing for all concerned is for him to get the death penalty
posted by criticalbill at 4:27 AM on January 27, 2005


My grandfather committed suicide by jumping off a roof, because he'd had a debilitating stroke several years earlier and felt that he was a shadow of his former self and a burden on others. That is my only personal connection to suicide, but it happened before I was born, so I cannot speak with any authority here.

I suppose that my mental image of suicide comes from the movies, if anything, and the movies tend to over-romanticize the act, painting it as noble sacrifice, quiet stoicism forcing the hand of the brave victim.

The reality, as some above has pointed out, is not as clear cut, and is often much, much more tragic.
posted by LondonYank at 4:32 AM on January 27, 2005


Yes, but still. Clearly the guy was not well in the head, and the horrible decision he made to get out of the first horrible decision he made had tragic consequences for people he had no intention of harming. Charging him with murder is obscene. (Manslaughter, maybe.)

Poor bastard.
posted by fandango_matt at 4:42 AM on January 27, 2005


Cases such as this one in Los Angeles are just about as deplorable, in my view, as those murder-suicides one hears about from time to time, where a head-of-the-household kills his family and then himself.

This happened to a childhood friend of mine: her father (I remember him pretending to be a French waiter, serving us kids a platter of cookies with a dishtowel draped over his arm) had been caught embezzling company money (to buy stocks) so he shot my friend, her mother and then himself.

Suicide is not always wrong and is not always selfish: for people who are dying slow deaths or are in constant pain, suicide might spare their families years of grief. But in my friend's father's case, he decided to take his family with him. A selfish decision? One could argue one way or the other but his entire family remains just as dead.

I remember reading an interview with Art Spiegelman in which he was asked why one particular issue of his magazine RAW was subtitled 'The Magazine of Postponed Suicides.' Spiegelman replied that he saw the phrase as hopeful. If you keep postponing your suicide, you're going to live. Spiegelman knew people who had used this trick to sustain themselves during The Holocaust. Having the option of suicide was the one bit of power the prisoners had, knowing that they always had an out.

If my friend's father had kept postponing his suicide, he would've gone to jail, served his time and been released, and my friend and her mother would still be alive.
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 4:44 AM on January 27, 2005


A friend of my father's was diagnosed with cancer while staying at my dad's (he was a house-guest... his main residence was in another state...). They opened him up for a biopsy, and then closed him up right away... it had spread far and wide.

My dad found him in the living-room. He had blown his brains out with a gun he had bought that afternoon.

He was nice enough to roll up the rug, though...

I often wonder why he did that in a friend's home, rather than taking a walk in the woods, or something. Maybe he wanted his body to be easily found...
posted by jpburns at 4:47 AM on January 27, 2005


A member of my family who committed suicide did so in a way that made it clear that she didn't want any member of her family to have to find her body, and I'd say that's a pretty good example of suicide etiquette.

I don't think suicide is inherently more selfish than forcing someone to live who doesn't want to do so any more.
posted by ITheCosmos at 4:56 AM on January 27, 2005


hincandenza, say what you want about US gun laws but they are a big, big help to -- among other categories -- Americans who want to take their own lives.
I hear what you say, but it's not true for Americans. you guys, if you feel like doing so, have the right to form a well-armed militia of one and blow your brains out, end of the story. no need to blow up two trains like this LA fuck just did
posted by matteo at 4:58 AM on January 27, 2005


I am not certain as to the effectiveness of sleeping pills. There is always the risk, as mentioned by hincandenza, of the pills doing damage but not ending life. Found this link on the practical side of things.

With regard to what dg said about murder-suicide; for those who are interested, the character of Charlie Hume, in Confessions of a Crap Artist by Philip K. Dick, is a good fictional example of what that mind could possibly look like.

We are all, to an extent, inherently selfish and we are allowed to act selfishly as long as our acts do not harm others. But I wonder if suicide is rational. I suppose it can be but in many cases (and I presume this one) it isn't. I think it would be reasonable to expect a person who makes an irrational decision to end his/her life to make other irrational decisions about how to do so. If we assume that the decision to commit suicide is irrational then can we accuse a person who makes such a decision of being selfish?
posted by Binliner at 5:09 AM on January 27, 2005


I imagine he'd rather be in a place of comfort, jpburns. Not unlike terminal patients that prefer to go home to die.
posted by Plinko at 5:15 AM on January 27, 2005


There was the bestselling book in Japan about the best ways to kill yourself that caused an awful lot of kerfuffle in the news a while back - apparently it had sold over 1.2 million copies back in 1999.

Quite why they didn't go and pick up a used copy is beyond me.
posted by longbaugh at 5:20 AM on January 27, 2005


Try finding a good, clean, risk-less way to kill yourself- go on, try. It's not by any means easy.

<not-making-light-of-the-subject>The only thing that I can think of would be a Futurama approved suicide booth, but obviously they don't exist. I always thought that was dark for a cartoon</not-making-light-of-the-subject>
posted by TheDonF at 5:21 AM on January 27, 2005


I like what Fuzzy Monster wrote about Spiegelman. I think the same way. No matter how bad things seem in the "terror of the situation" all you have to do is wait a week. Mostly it just takes one new morning to make whatever the situation seem a lot less dire (assuming one isn't suffering from mental defect). However bad one might feel at any moment likely has much more to do with internal chemistry than any external circumstances.

I also think it should be noted that this deranged fellow can't be charged with murder. It would have to be homicide or manslaughter. Negligence does not equal intent.
posted by effwerd at 5:24 AM on January 27, 2005


How about "Ethical Suicide Parlors" like in Soylant Green?

Listen to the Pastorale... look at some nature pictures...

Afterwards you could join the food chain.

(all joking aside... I think suicide should be a dignified and legal alternative to a painful death. My mom died of lung cancer, but she suffered for 1 1/2 years first...)
posted by jpburns at 5:27 AM on January 27, 2005


Another point: any way you cut it, suicide is an act of violence, even (as in cases of painful terminal illness) it is done for rational reasons. Those willing to lash out at themselves in such drastic ways often end up hurting others as well, and whether or not they are making rational decisions is besides the point, legally speaking. The man in this case certainly had the intention to kill at least one person (himself), and that he ended up killing so many others does, I think, warrant a charge of murder.

I agree with the many who say that suicide is always, in some ways selfish. I don't think the main question is whether there should be an etiquette for this desperate act, but rather: Why is it that so many suicides are so public? What is it about suicide that drives people to do it in ways that include others, often total strangers?
posted by jasonsmall at 5:28 AM on January 27, 2005


suicide is usually selfish isn't it? usually suicide is really detrimental t othose around you, even if you don't have any loved ones. i'm not saying it's impossible to pull off, but selfless suicide is tough...unless you get a chance for martyrdom....martyrdom totally kicks ass....
posted by es_de_bah at 5:47 AM on January 27, 2005


What is it about suicide that drives people to do it in ways that include others, often total strangers?

I'm just venturing a guess here, but I'd suspect that many of the public suicides were not done out of a desire to "be seen" or involve anybody else. Rather, it seems to me that a number of the easiest ways to kill oneself are inherently public.

It takes little-to-no effort or preparation on the suicide's part to plummet from the top of a bridge or building, or to stroll or roll onto train tracks or out into traffic. With an overdose on pills (to continue the theme), you first have to figure out what kind of pills to take, then you have to obtain the pills if they weren't already in your medicine cabinet, then you have to decide where to take them, and then you have to wait for the pills to begin taking effect, giving you plenty of time to think and agonize and possibly second-guess, and then... That's a lot of work for somebody who completely lacks the will to live.

Not trying to make light of it, but I can definitely see why the easy-although-public ways to do it would be attractive options.
posted by abiku at 5:57 AM on January 27, 2005


Hmm, might be right, abiku. Not only easy, but relatively easy to contemplate -- every kitchen has a sharp knife, but stabbing or cutting oneself take more steely determination than waiting for a train to come.

Still, I would argue that most people who successfully commit suicide plan it very carefully, sometimes for months in advance, which makes the little-to-no effort or preparation angle seem less likely.
posted by jasonsmall at 6:05 AM on January 27, 2005


No matter how bad things seem in the "terror of the situation" all you have to do is wait a week.

When I was about 14, and a miserable adolescent, something appallingly terrible happened at school (who knows what? I don't remember, everything was so dramatic at 14) and I decided I would kill myself. I remember being curled in a chair, thinking about how I would do it, and there was this weird audible click in my head - the only time I've ever heard it - and I realized that I could wait. The power to end things would always be there, but maybe something fun would happen tomorrow, or the next day, or next week. Even just a good laugh, or a pretty sky, or a rich dessert: it was worth sticking around for. I could kill myself after that if I still wanted to.
Best and most common-sensical decision I ever made.

(From years covering homicides, I would say the family murder-suicide thing appears very selfish on the surface, but they are usually done out of unselfish motives. Less "If I can't live, neither can they" and more "I want to save them the misery of dealing with my death/crimes/whatever." Twisted love murder-suicides are the most selfish though: "I can't live without her and she doesn't want me, therefore I will kill myself but take her with me so no one else can have her.")

And lastly, to get back on topic after all the yammering, here is the New Yorker's excellent piece about the Golden Gate Bridge and how people travel for miles to jump from it.
posted by CunningLinguist at 6:05 AM on January 27, 2005


whether or not they are making rational decisions is besides the point, legally speaking

If his lawyers have anything to do with it I'm sure his motives and rational at the time will be a major point in court. I'd say his lawyers will try using a, "not guilty by reason of insanity" defence. The prosecution, on the other hand will try arguing mens rea (guilty mind) and he is culpable.

Even in cases where someone threatens to commit suicide it still matters legally. Under those circumstances a person can be held against their will using an applicable mental health act under the, "harm to self or others" category.

What is it about suicide that drives people to do it in ways that include others, often total strangers?

Access to method of death. In rural areas you'll find statistically there are more suicides by guns because there are more guns in rural areas (for hunting, farming) than say bridges or buildings tall enough to leap from.
posted by squeak at 6:06 AM on January 27, 2005


Suicide has been around for thousands of years and was considered the honorable thing to do. There's nothing inherently selfish about suicide.
posted by xammerboy at 6:12 AM on January 27, 2005


Still, I would argue that most people who successfully commit suicide plan it very carefully, sometimes for months in advance, which makes the little-to-no effort or preparation angle seem less likely.

I would tend to agree with that, but it seems to me that many of those successful, carefully planned suicides would be private and, as such, outside of your view. Public suicides--planned or otherwise--get more news because they were public, which has the side-effect of making it seem like they're in the majority.

According to this page, "Firearms are the most commonly used method of suicide for men and women, accounting for 60 percent of all suicides. [...] The second most common method for men is hanging; for women, the second most common method is self-poisoning including drug overdose."

It doesn't say, of course, whether the majority of those were carried out in private or in public, but I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority is still safely in the "private" realm.
posted by abiku at 6:20 AM on January 27, 2005


I was in the Metro in Montreal during a transit strike that saw us getting service between 8-10 and 4-6. Some guy jumped onto the tracks on the other side of the platform. The Metro closed until at least after 10.

I was angry. I didn't feel bad for the "poor man". He knew there was a strike, and that he would be inconveniencing thousands that day. I couldn't generate any sympathy. I still can't.

Is this horrible?
posted by jon_kill at 6:23 AM on January 27, 2005


If your life were costing (and not just financially) too much for you and the people around you, suicide would not be selfish at all.

Say you can't bear your own life--perhaps you have a painful, incurable disease that prevents you from doing anything but suffering--and you are alone enough that you wouldn't break anyone's heart by dying, or your loved ones would rather you died than went on suffering. If what you want is out, then do it.

But don't park your car in front of a train and run away like this poor "deranged" guy did. (Though asking a deranged guy to act sanely in the middle of a suicide attempt is silly.) If you have a car, park it in a quiet place, put a hose on the tailpipe, run it into the car, seal the windows, start it up, sit back, and relax. If you have no car, try a bridge or another high place. Do it unobserved, especially if someone might be hurt trying to "save" you. If you're a shooter, do it outside and away from anyone you might accidentally shoot. If you're a jumper, don't land on anyone. If you're an overdoser, be sure you've got the right mix so you don't just make yourself sick, and make sure you do it when and where you'll be unobserved long enough; consult online sources for more. If you want to leave a pretty corpse for someone, use drugs or the tailpipe.
posted by pracowity at 6:32 AM on January 27, 2005


Suicide has been around for thousands of years and was considered the honorable thing to do.

In many cases by the same people/cultures who thought a duel to the death was a reasonable response to a petty insult.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 6:32 AM on January 27, 2005


Slightly OT: A very easy, non-violent way to off yourself involves a t-shirt. Simple place your head through the sleeve and hook the other part of the shirt to something higher, lean your head forward and slowly suffocate. This is often used by people on suicide watch in prison/hospitals. It only takes a few minutes. (This is from a suicidology class, I don't just make up shit like this)
posted by shoepal at 6:33 AM on January 27, 2005 [1 favorite]


jasonsmall,

The man in this case certainly had the intention to kill at least one person (himself), and that he ended up killing so many others does, I think, warrant a charge of murder.

Well, I am only a reluctant acquaintance of the law, so I can't speak as an authority, but I would think that his chosen method constitutes negligence and not intent; he did not willfully kill those people with malice of forethought.

For instance, a drunk driver must certainly know that the act of driving while intoxicated puts others at risk, but if such an act results in the death of another, is the drunk driver charged with murder? Or negligent homicide?
posted by effwerd at 6:36 AM on January 27, 2005


This is from a suicidology class, I don't just make up shit like this

From a what? Kids these days. In my day, we took shop class, maybe learned how to sever an artery with a circular saw or something. And we liked it. We never had a whole class devoted to... suicidology?
posted by pracowity at 6:41 AM on January 27, 2005


The body doesn't want to die, and any method with a high probability of success also has an unfortunate chance that survival will leave the person far worse off than before- severely maimed or even brain damaged.

Not only does the body not want to die, but the government seems to have a stake in things as well. The bottle of pills method that used to be so popular has declined in its usage not only because of it's relative subtlety, but also because pill manufacturers are required to package their products in smaller, blister-sealed packages. Would be suiciders have fewer pills on hand, and furthermore, they have to re-confirm their decision with each pill they pop out of it's seal. Similar to the mirrors in Japanese train stations, but this one seems to actually work. Cars today run cleaner as well, meaning the old "hose from the tailpipe to the window" method allows for a much longer period of consideration before the big sleep. And for you terminally ill folks, recall that Dr. Kervorkian had a pretty good thing going on a few years back, until his operation got the kibosh. I think I read a good article that tied all this stuff together in The Economist awhile ago, but their archives aren't online, it would seem.
posted by idontlikewords at 6:47 AM on January 27, 2005


Yes, but a drunk driver usually doesn't set out with the sole purpose of killing himself. Imagine someone wants to kill themselves by blowing themselves up in their house, knowing dimly that there is a chance the explosion could also kill people nearby, but going ahead with it anyway. If they run out of the house at the last minute, and when the bomb goes off some innocent bystander is killed, doesn't that constitute some stronger than negligence?

Sorry. Just realized this whole argument is miles away from the original question.
posted by jasonsmall at 6:56 AM on January 27, 2005


Pracowity: cases such as the one you describe are what I had in mind when I qualified myself: almost inherently selfish… to which I should probably further append, in times of peace & plenty. In fact, I think in a case like that, euthanasia ought to be an available option, in order to save terminally sick people the trouble & stress of having to figure out how to kill themselves - if that's what they want. The trouble is, there is usually someone left behind to grieve & regret; there is usually at least one other person's feelings that have to be ignored, or subordinated to ones own: hence the selfishness of the act.
posted by misteraitch at 6:58 AM on January 27, 2005


If it were easier in this country to get decent mental health care more people would choose to live.
posted by konolia at 7:01 AM on January 27, 2005


If it were easier in this country to get decent mental health care more people would choose to live.

It's cheaper for insurers to provide pills. "Feeling down, bucko? Try a bottle of these."
posted by pracowity at 7:26 AM on January 27, 2005




Plus, he has now been arrested for murder.

Murder is rather ridiculous, seeing as there was no intent. Multiple cases of manslaughter seems more appropriate.

expecting a person who is suicidal to act reasonably and use common sense is ... well, absurd. To ask that they comply with some rules of "etiquette" isn't possible considering the mind set of the severely depressed person, they are mentally ill and incapable of making sane, reasoned decisions.

Your presumption that everyone who decides to end their lives is "severely depressed" and "mentally ill" is false and reveals more about your own biases than about the motives of others.
posted by rushmc at 7:32 AM on January 27, 2005


In 1991 the suicide how-to guide Final Exit was on the New York Times bestseller list for 18 weeks.

You can get a copy of Final Exit for as low as 36 cents plus shipping. or, go right to the author's Euthanasia Research & Guidance Organization where, among other treats, you learn that "purchasing direct from ERGO gives you not only an autographed copy but the latest self-deliverance updates as addenda."

I know 99% of purchasers don't plan on killing themselves right after they pull the book from their mailbox, but something about an autographed copy of a death how-to tome makes me smile wanly.
posted by Cassford at 7:36 AM on January 27, 2005


If it were easier in this country to get decent mental health care more people would choose to live.

My former boss' son hanged himself while he was a patient at a well-respected mental health facility. "Mike" was 38 and had been dx'd as paranoid/schizophrenic when he was 19. He'd had a bad episode this particular weekend and was admitted to this hospital (his father had money and connections, so it was only the best). He was placed on a suicide watch, which at this place meant an orderly checking his room every 15 minutes. Yet, Mike managed to walk out of his room, walk over to a payphone in the hallway, and hang himself with the cord.

Was it merciful in a way? As long as I'd known Mike (11 years), when he was lucid he always told me how much pain he was in, how he dreaded the return of the "voices", and how he wished he could be like "he used to be." So his suffering was ended, but his father was never the same after that...Mike had been his only son, his pride and joy, the successor to heading the family business. I watched my boss (who was in his 70s at the time) slowly deteriorate, almost shrivel before my eyes. I think in the back of his mind he always thought Mike would get better one day.
posted by Oriole Adams at 7:37 AM on January 27, 2005


Well, after some quick research, it looks like you are closer to the truth than I am, jasonsmall. I was even wrong about the term, malice aforethought. Anyway, here's what I found that makes me think you're right:

The terms, "willful, deliberate and premeditated" might give you the impression that only a killing that was carefully planned would be prosecuted as murder. But note Dressler's comment that: "Common law authorities included in the notion of intent to kill awareness that the death of another would result from one's actions, even if the actor had no particular desire to achieve such a consequence." (Dressler: 213). There goes, or so it seems, any notion that murder is to be limited to those instances in which one carefully plans the death of another is out the window.
posted by effwerd at 7:40 AM on January 27, 2005


he probably thought, like many might, that the train would just tear through his car without pausing, like it was wet tissue paper.

Probably true. Supposedly if the train was being pulled by the locomotive, that's probably the way it would have happened. But in this case, the locomotive was pushing the train from the back, so the lighter passenger cars hit the vehicle instead, derailing the train. Union workers are already making noise about requiring locomotives to pull rather than push trains from now on.
posted by chundo at 7:43 AM on January 27, 2005


I'm reminded of a character in Milan Kundera's Immortality. She decided to commit suicide so she walked out on to a busy highway. The cars avoided her, initiating an accident that killed several. She walked away with a renewed respect for life.

Not saying there is a moral there. Just an interesting parallel.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:00 AM on January 27, 2005


Union workers are already making noise about requiring locomotives to pull rather than push trains from now on.

With so many lives at stake, maybe they could go further than that and have a small car zooming along ahead of the train. It could be pilotless, just a little vehicle (with a really big horn and cowcatcher) passing audio and video back to the engine. If it had trouble, the real train would have more time to stop. (Someone could intentionally cut in between the two vehicles at just the right moment, but it would be harder than just parking on the track and waiting.)
posted by pracowity at 8:06 AM on January 27, 2005


slight tangent : do you think that if this guy was trying to commit suicide that they'd actually give him the death penalty?

i base my question on, of all things, an episode of Law & Order (i know, i know). in this episode, a man not only plead guilty to murder, but asked for the death penalty that justice be rendered swiftly. he had to undergo pysch testing to prove that he really was reasonable and knew what he was asking, the argument being that if he was insane, this would be tantamount to a suicide... and suicide is illegal...

i don't remember the outcome of the episode, but i wonder how it translates into the real world. can you give the death penalty to someone who actually wants to die?
posted by grapefruitmoon at 8:17 AM on January 27, 2005


Back in the days that I worked for a pharmaceutical company, I ran across the wonderful phrase "Potentially Lethal Episodes of Self-Harm" rather than "Suicide attempt", probably because it's not always easy to tell a cry for help from a genuine attempt. Plus, it probably sounds better in clinical reports. It creeped me out about as much as when I realized that "Serious Adverse Event" meant someone was dead.

I can attest to the idea of suicide feeling selfish though. I went through a long period where I didn't especially want to live, but I did not consider myself suicidal because I figured that there wasn't any way to die that wouldn't upset the people around me. Since I was the terrible wretch who deserved to be in pain, it would hardly be fair of me to pass that pain onto people who weren't. It wasn't their fault that I sucked, after all. So that whole thinking of other people before taking action can be a good thing, you know.
posted by Karmakaze at 8:31 AM on January 27, 2005


This man does not deserve the chair.

He deserves to be locked in a room with the relatives of the ten dead.

Chickenshit asshole. I don't care if you have mental problem, anyone with enough sense to successfully park a car on train tracks has enough sense to realize you'll probably kill people in the train.
posted by jaded at 8:48 AM on January 27, 2005


word on the local (LA) radio this morning is that he will be arraigned today on 10 counts of murder with special circumstances, meaning he will be eligible for the death penalty.
posted by killy willy at 8:52 AM on January 27, 2005


also, he is on suicide watch.
/ironyfilter
posted by killy willy at 8:55 AM on January 27, 2005


Leaving the circumstances of the current case aside for the moment, this topic comes up every now and again of MeFi and it always takes the same form.

Declaring suicide a selfish act, is akin to saying that "terrorists are cowardly"; things that our culture instructs us to say reflexively to try to make some degree of sense out of an otherwise senseless action. To be so simpleminded about it demonstrates a failing to understand the nature of the causes of suicide attempts, which are generally due to unchecked/untreated mental illness and a resulting breakdown of logical faculty (excepting those cases where people elect to end a life rather than live with debilitating physical conditions).

Does this excuse the actions of this particular person? Of course not. In choosing the method he did, showing a complete disregard for other people's lives, he may have been psychotic as well as suffering from severe depression. But having known more than my share of people that were successful in going through with this as well as having dealt with severe depression in my own family/circle of friends, to parrot that "suicide is selfish" really misses the point.

If you're curious at all about this, I highly recommend Styron's Darkness Visible. It really illustrates the point well about how severe depression affects, and in some cases completely overwhelms the capacity for logical thought/judgment and decision making.
posted by psmealey at 8:57 AM on January 27, 2005


Someone in my town just went behind our local movie theater, tied a rope around his neck, tied the other end to a lampost, got in his car, and floored it.

His head was found some distance away by some kids later that night. I respect a person's right to end their own life... but I feel terrible for those kids.
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 9:23 AM on January 27, 2005


The story I've linked (Scroll down to second item: "Bodega Bay attempted suicide") here is an example of someone who decided to take himself out and harm as few people as possible. The word around town was that he had just gotten out of jail for "attempted suicide." And yet....

He left behind two puzzled sons, a lot of friends and relatives, and a grieving wife who said at his beachside memorial, "...I had no idea that Kevin and I had so many friends. If he could see you all here now, perhaps we wouldn't all be here now." IMO, suicide is always a selfish act.
posted by Lynsey at 9:33 AM on January 27, 2005


I saw this animation of what probably occurred on local LA news last night. Mind boggling and nauseating.

I was struck that is seems so much like some "two trains traveling" math problem. The timing and events that had to happen together to make this happen is just unbelievable. Suck city. So many people affected. Horrible.
posted by rexruff at 9:33 AM on January 27, 2005


grapefruitmoon: [C]an you give the death penalty to someone who actually wants to die?

If you're really curious about this issue, you might want to look into what's going on in Connecticut right now with the upcoming (or not) execution of serial killer Michael Ross (Cornell '81!). Ross wants to die now, before he has exhaused all of his appeals. He was scheduled to die within days, but a judge has ordered a stay to look into mental competency issues on the theory that living conditions on death row have made him suicidal and therefore....incompetent to make the decision to die. So wanting to die means you are too crazy to decide you want to die....maybe.
posted by availablelight at 9:45 AM on January 27, 2005


Suicide has been around for thousands of years and was considered the honorable thing to do. There's nothing inherently selfish about suicide.

pleanty of atrocities have been considered honorable at some time. suicidegets more than a few.

but it's still inherently selfish...it's almost never done for other people...being selfish is sometimes justified (euthanasia) but it's always about the person doing it...especially if honor can be attatched to it.
posted by es_de_bah at 9:53 AM on January 27, 2005


maybe they could go further than that and have a small car zooming along ahead of the train. It could be pilotless, just a little vehicle (with a really big horn and cowcatcher) passing audio and video back to the engine.

Maybe we could just wrap the whole world in bubblewrap...
posted by rushmc at 10:16 AM on January 27, 2005


The Japanese solution of charging relatives a cleanup fee is interesting. But suppose someone was committing suicide because his family hated him? That would give him the opportunity for a truly selfish suicide.
posted by QuietDesperation at 10:17 AM on January 27, 2005


Oddly, I was thinking about the nature of martyrdom just minutes before I heard about this guy. He seems like the anti-Norman Morrison, kind of.
posted by cookie-k at 10:18 AM on January 27, 2005


Said hincandenza: Try finding a good, clean, risk-less way to kill yourself- go on, try. It's not by any means easy.

Go to the beach, and just start swimming out to sea. Exhaustion and hypothermia set in when you're a mile or two from land, and you'll drown because you won't have enough energy to swim back if you change your mind. Your body will probably not be found, and your loved ones will forever wonder what happened to you instead of the closure a dead body brings.

Jumping from the Golden Gate Bridge is 99% effective--if the fall doesn't kill you immediately, the current will sweep your blunt-force-trauma injured body (ruptured spleen, broken pelvis) out to sea, where you'll drown and eventually wash ashore on the Farallons and be nibbled by crabs for a few weeks until the Coast Guard finds what's left of you. Buildings work too, but there's the chance you'll land on and kill someone and wind up in a wheelchair.

Guns are messy, and if you miss, you'll wind up with brain damage, but there won't be any doubt about your intentions.

Drinking Drano and other lye-based cleaners destroys the lining to your esophagus--in the hospital they'll stick a fiber-optic camera down your throat where it'll scrape against the exposed nerves. If you cut your wrists you need a good knowledge of anatomy and a high pain threshold in order to repeatedly hit the arteries, otherwise you're more likely to cut tendons and wind up with claw hands.

Most of the other options--overdosing on pills and subsequently aspirating (choking on your own vomit), car exhaust, hanging (most people strangle themselves instead of snapping the brain stem)--kill you by cutting off the brain's supply of oxygen which leaves you with brain damage if you're unsuccessful.

This was all from a well-written essay I once read about suicide, describing the various methods and their respective pros and cons and it was probably one of the best prevention tools I've ever encountered.
posted by fandango_matt at 10:19 AM on January 27, 2005


If you want to leave a pretty corpse for someone, use drugs or the tailpipe.

Pretty corpse? I thought carbon monoxide turned you a bright color, and when you overdose on drugs, you die while aspirating vomit.

Let's face it, death isn't pretty.
posted by agregoli at 10:24 AM on January 27, 2005


"Suicide is selfish" is one of those pat generalizations that people use to defend against thoughts of sympathy for other human beings. First off, it's obviously incorrect since anyone can cook up not-unplausible scenarios where the suicide appears to be a selfless act. People opting out of months or years of physical pain, from illness or mental problems or even such things as overwhelming shame or guilt.

"Suicide is selfish" is only very rarely the conclusion of some deeply held philosophy about selfishness; it's usually just an easy dismissal to protect oneself from challenges. "Those people are selfish bad baddies and suicide is never okay, and I refuse to change my mind about this. How dare they put their feelings ahead of others, they should just continue to be miserable and not upset others and not be so weak, they annoy me, wah." Who's selfish, again?

A better one I've seen used is "suicides are cowards."
posted by fleacircus at 10:25 AM on January 27, 2005


I remember a teacher telling us, "Don't kill yourself--they'll make jokes about you." These days, she'd probably say, "Pictures of you will be posted on Rotten and Ogrish."
posted by fandango_matt at 10:33 AM on January 27, 2005


I'm of the opinion that he probably had no idea that his actions would lead to anything more than the destruction of his Jeep. The guy lived in Compton and was a long time drug user. Having known a few people like this guy, he probably had a distinctly different world view than most of the folks that visit MeFi. Having said that, I think he's a jerk and who knows if he even intended to go through with the suicide. It could have just been a dramatic attempt for attention from his estranged wife. Tragedy aside, I do feel that if society offers so little to the marginalized then there should be a little tolerance and understanding for those who would rather get out of the line than stand at the very back. Again - big jerk.
posted by lazymonster at 10:44 AM on January 27, 2005


psmealey: Declaring suicide a selfish act, is akin to saying that "terrorists are cowardly"

I said this in passing, so just to defend myself: suicide is selfish when one does it out of concerns for the self and not for others. It's justifiable a lot of the time, and we shouldn't look down on people for sometimes acting selfishly. I'm not placing much of a derogatory connotation on the word 'selfish' here.

fleacircus:

"Suicide is selfish" is one of those pat generalizations that people use to defend against thoughts of sympathy for other human beings... People opting out of months or years of physical pain


That's still selfish behavior, though behavior we can empathize with and understand and justify. Of course, this is just word-squabbling - you guys read 'selfish' to mean 'too selfish' which is not what I meant when I wrote it - but I wanted to stand up for myself and the others in this thread who wrote similar things.

Truly unselfish suicide, I think, would involve cases of martyrdom and dying for a cause, or euthanizing oneself to avoid being a burden on others.
posted by painquale at 10:59 AM on January 27, 2005


fandango_matt: This was all from a well-written essay I once read about suicide, describing the various methods and their respective pros and cons

I once saw a video of Damien Hirst's in a museum that went through various ways of shooting yourself and the problems that could arise. Putting a gun to your temple might merely sever your optic nerves, leaving you permanently blind; a gun in the mouth might blow your face off and leave the brain intact. The most reliable method? Put the gun directly on the crown of your head and fire straight down.
posted by painquale at 11:04 AM on January 27, 2005


How could a gun in the mouth blow your face off? Oh, you mean pointing up. Pointing it at the back of the throat blows out the brain stem - no bad accidents there.
posted by agregoli at 11:17 AM on January 27, 2005


you guys read 'selfish' to mean 'too selfish'

Not at all. My point is that employing the word "selfish" in the context of suicide implies that the person attempting suicide has gone through a rational process of weighing the positives and the negatives, and ultimately deciding that the outcome is in his/her best interest.

In cases of suicide of triggered by crippling, unmanaged depression the rational process has been stunted or completely obliterated.

My point was not to harangue people for using the word and implying what fleacircus did (though I don't entirely disagree with him/her), but to protest that facilely categorizing it as selfish enables people to file it away and prevent them from any hope of understanding why it happens, what the warning signs are (to distinguish real clinical depression on a suicide track from adolescent drama) and how to prevent it.
posted by psmealey at 11:18 AM on January 27, 2005


rushmc:
Your presumption that everyone who decides to end their lives is "severely depressed" and "mentally ill" is false and reveals more about your own biases than about the motives of others.


This needs vetting, but it sound familiar from what I read when I was researching the subject last year:

Nearly 90% of all persons who commit suicide suffer from a treatable mental illness.
posted by cortex at 11:20 AM on January 27, 2005


With so many lives at stake, maybe they could go further than that and have a small car zooming along ahead of the train. It could be pilotless, just a little vehicle (with a really big horn and cowcatcher) passing audio and video back to the engine. If it had trouble, the real train would have more time to stop.

Two things wrong with that. First being that I'd be more than willing to bet that the engineer saw the car long before the train hit it, they do have mirrors, and watch those when in push mode. Even with advance visual warning, I doubt the train could have been stopped in time, they just can't stop that fast.

The other is that even a cowcatcher type car (like a caboose?) wouldn't stop the train from derailing like it did. If a train is pulling and the engine hits something like a car, it'd slow quickly but the lighter cars behind it would slow reasonably easily as well. If the engine came to a sudden and complete halt, it'd certainly derail, but if the engine hit something and slowed suddenly, the cars behind it are going to slow with it. When a car hits first, it's dealing with the massive slowing in front of it while the engine's inertia pushes foward into it, and the car goes pretty much the only way it can go, it deflects off to the path of least resistance.

They should have some sort of switchyard at each end where they can move the engine to opposite sides of the train, but I'm pretty sure that it'd be impossible to make a station big enough in urban LA areas, nobody would want to give up the land around those stations to make a switchyard.
posted by Swervo at 11:24 AM on January 27, 2005


I've heard a heroin overdose is a good way to go. You hit the floor dreaming, and never come back.

Personally, I don't much care one way or the other if someone chooses to suicide: I just wish they'd be more considerate about it. Don't leave a gawdawful, therapy-inducing mess! Don't traumatize everyone even worse than they would normally be! Be nice about it, ferchrissakes!
posted by five fresh fish at 11:27 AM on January 27, 2005


Murder is rather ridiculous, seeing as there was no intent

I don't think he needs to have intended specifically to kill anyone: all that is necessary is that he intended to take the actions that immediately resulted in these deaths. I could sneak up behind you and brain you with a 9-iron, but "I only meant to send him to the hospital" wouldn't be a valid defense if you wound up dying. Similarly, if I planted a bomb in what I thought to be an abandoned building, and it wound up killing someone who I didn't expect to be there, it would be murder. Just like deaths that result from arson are murder, even if the arsonist committed his crime for insurance purposes. I think this is pretty much the same thing.

I think I read a good article that tied all this stuff together in The Economist awhile ago, but their archives aren't online, it would seem.

Here it is, though you'll need a subscription to read it.
posted by mr_roboto at 12:10 PM on January 27, 2005


No, this is definitely a case of a "selfish suicide". Why do it in such a public way unless you either wanted a lot of witnesses or wanted to take out as many people as possible. People attempt suicide all of the time, but they rarely do it in such a way as to involve so many strangers.

Why not lay your head down on one of the rails and be decapitated? Why not just jump in front of the train as it sped past? He had enough presence of mind to unbuckle his seatbelt, open the door, and get out of the SUV - why couldn't he have started the car and simply drove out of the way? With the exception of mechanical failure, I think that this guy either simply didn't care if others got hurt or he wanted a bodycount. I'm not arguing that the guy isn't sick, just that underneath that sickness lies the personality of a narcisstic sociopath. A lot of the time these types do a "suicide by cop". I think he is entirely deserving of a murder charge.

I say this as a person who has contemplated suicide more than once but has no intention of ever sucumbing to the impulse. The primary thing that keeps me from doing it is a desire not to hurt the people who love me; the fear of causing permanent damage if I fail and spiritual/karmic consequences are a close second and third. However, If it ever got to the point that I'd go through with it, I'd sure as hell make sure that I didn't injure anyone else in the process.
posted by echolalia67 at 12:13 PM on January 27, 2005


I'm sure this was covered when it first came out, but there could be a correlation here.
posted by lazymonster at 12:18 PM on January 27, 2005


He had enough presence of mind to unbuckle his seatbelt, open the door, and get out of the SUV - why couldn't he have started the car and simply drove out of the way?

In a story I read, the SUV was firmly stuck on the tracks, making the accident probably a lot worse. Who knows if that's true, and I'm definitely agreeing with you. I don't get the car thing (a mainly protective device?). Just jump in front of it.
posted by agregoli at 12:29 PM on January 27, 2005


local radio reports here in LA-LA land indicated that the SUV was definitely immobilized on the tracks, though details were scarce.

the resultant traffic tie-up was horrendous--that i can attest to as an eyewitness.

in such situations (and accident-related traffic delays are legion here in the southland), i do the best i can to squelch my misanthropic frustration and hope/pray for the wellbeing of all concerned.
posted by retronic at 12:52 PM on January 27, 2005


criticalbill: I think the death penalty is the last thing this guy should get. His poor decisions led to carnage and ruin for hundreds, if not thousands of people...why give him what he wanted in the first place? Does that really seem like a fitting punishment? In death his ruinous actions have no consequence to him- in effect, killing him would just vindicate him. The best punishment would be to let him rot in jail so he can think about what a selfish asshole he has been for the rest of his life.
posted by honeyx at 2:10 PM on January 27, 2005


fandango_matt: "Jumping from the Golden Gate Bridge is 99% effective--if the fall doesn't kill you immediately, the current will sweep your blunt-force-trauma injured body (ruptured spleen, broken pelvis) out to sea,"

I saw a show on History or Discovery that had an interview with a guy who jumped off the Golden Gate and lived - one of only 4 people known to have survived the jump, apparently.

The one thing he said that stuck with me is that as soon as he stepped off and started falling, he realized that he didn't want to die, that he wanted to live, and that he was doing something extremely bad and foolish. Because of the height of the bridge above the water, a person jumping from there has nearly 5 seconds to think about what they've just done - that would be one hellishly long 5 seconds of wishing you hadn't done it.

Being alive sucks sometimes, but it sure beats being dead.

My grandfather killed himself because he had a stroke and couldn't work anymore - his work was his life. He used a 12-gauge to the mouth, in his favorite chair at home. I think it was very selfish of him, but I kinda understand.

This guy here with the trains, that I don't understand so much... but "deranged" says a lot. You can't really expect anything rational from a deranged person, by definition.
posted by zoogleplex at 3:20 PM on January 27, 2005


Your presumption that everyone who decides to end their lives is "severely depressed" and "mentally ill" is false and reveals more about your own biases than about the motives of others.

Biased, nope. See cortex's comment :) If this was a discussion about kamikaze fighter pilots flying into ships or euthanasia then I would more than likely say something different but, this is about people who choose to kill themselves by using trains.

To add to cortex's link there are these related statistics as well:

Ten to 15 times more suicides occur among those people with untreated, severe mental illness. More than 1,000 homicides in the United States are committed each year by people who have untreated mental illness.

posted by squeak at 3:55 PM on January 27, 2005


The best punishment would be to let him rot in jail so he can think about what a selfish asshole he has been for the rest of his life.

If your idea of the "best" punishment is the "most punitive," then yes, perhaps.

cortex and squeak, I don't deny a correlation between mental illness and suicides; I'm simply saying that not all suicide is the product of mental illness.
posted by rushmc at 4:08 PM on January 27, 2005


I might be wrong but I think your presumed I think all suicides are the result of mental illness, I don't (euthanasia as an example). In the context of this thread and the topic in general, trains as weapons in suicide attempts, I think depression* or some other form of mental illness is an appropriate guess to this man's mind set at the time of the crime considering the statistics.

Truth is we will never know, the psychiatrists who interview him might get a glimpse at his psyche but only the perpetrator will truly know if he was off his rocker at the time or just being a selfish a**hole. From the articles it mentions he has had problems in the past with family and drugs and has expressed suicidal thoughts before - these are typical indicators of depression/suicide or some other form of mental illness. He might be a psychopath who was trying to manipulate others or he could be borderline personality disordered and acting in a manner typical of people with BPD. Maybe he is mentally ill or maybe he isn't?

I still stand by my initial comment and think the majority of suicides are the product of mental illness and therefore it is absurd to ask that reason/common sense be applied when commiting suicide since a person who is mentally ill is typically incapable of making reasoned/common sense decisions.

Make sense now or have I run off on some irrelevant tangent?

*Depressed individuals can have homicidal thoughts, be delusional or psychotic as well.
posted by squeak at 6:48 PM on January 27, 2005


willful, deliberate and premeditated

I was a juror on a murder trial in California last year, and one of the issues in our deliberation was that these terms have different meanings in a legal context than they do in everyday use. As it was explained to us, "willful" basically means "you did it on purpose," "deliberate" means "you debated the consequences and decided to continue," and "premeditated" means "you thought about it before you did it."

Premeditation doesn't mean you planned it in advance, and could happen really quickly. The prosecutor used the example of doing a U-turn across a solid yellow line to get a parking place. Also, if you fired a gun into a crowd and killed someone, even if you didn't mean to, it would be second-degree murder because it's an intentional act that could cause death.

This poor guy's 0-3 in suicide attempts (he cut his wrists and stabbed himself in the chest before failing with the SUV), so I think his mental state is pretty shaky and he shouldn't be charged with murder.

Finally, there's Dorothy Parker's notes on suicide attempts:
Razors pain you;
Rivers are damp;
Acids stain you;
And drugs cause cramp.
Guns aren't lawful;
Nooses give;
Gas smells awful;
You might as well live
posted by kirkaracha at 9:04 PM on January 27, 2005


Another good suicide poem.
posted by koeselitz at 10:36 AM on January 28, 2005


More information on the suspect. A badly written article, but interesting nonetheless.

Just because someone is mentally ill it doesn't mean that the individual is incapable of distinguishing between right or wrong. It's a bit of a slippery slope we're going down here - if someone who is mentally ill is never responsible for their bad choices, doesn't that open the door to say that any number of choices a mentally ill person might make are invalid because they are incapable of making any reasoned choice?

I've worked with alot of mentally ill adults and in my experience, most are more than capable of distinguishing between right and wrong, despite outward appearances. If anything, part of what makes Schizophrenia so cruel, for example, is the fact that people with the disorder often hear voices telling them to do terrible things, something that they find extremely distressing because they know that what they are being told to do is wrong. The overwhelming majority of mentally ill do not act out in violent ways, and while many who do act out are completely out of touch with reality and no longer know the difference between right and wrong, some who are violent behave that way because they want to.
posted by echolalia67 at 4:35 PM on January 28, 2005


It was a fucking SUV. If an SUV can't get off a set of railroad tracks (obviously, the front wheels must have been capable of crossing both the left and right tracks), then it is clearly defective. How tall are railroad tracks? Six inches? Gimme a break.
posted by beth at 6:08 PM on January 29, 2005


Suicide has been around for thousands of years and was considered the honorable thing to do. There's nothing inherently selfish about suicide.

Not within a Western Christian tradition - suicides were denied a Christian burial and were buried at crossroads, with the general belief that they would go to hell.

On the "suicides are selfish" theme. You have to understand that by the time someone gets to that state of mind, they are perfectly aware that their actions will cause pain to some others, but, at the same time, killing themself still seems rational, as a way of ending unbearable pain (e.g. I die and cause great pain to others, but I relieve a greater pain to myself, so it actually seems logical).
posted by Infinite Jest at 9:26 PM on January 29, 2005


« Older ShareWare...   |   Ivan Noble's Tumour Diary Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post