Sunday, December 16, 2012

Newtown, Connecticut:
A grim Barack Obama made a powerful speech tonight from the Sandy Hook Elementary School auditorium, where he told residents not to lose heart in the wake of the devastating shootings that last Friday took 27 lives, including 20 children, 5 teachers, 1 school psychologist, and the gunman aged 20.

He slowly read the names of these innocent children, just 6 and 7 years old:

“Charlotte . . . Daniel . . . Olivia . . . Josephine . . . Ana . . . Dylan . . . Madeleine . . . Catherine . . . Chase . . . Jesse . . . James . . . Grace . . . Emilie . . . Jack . . . Noah . . . Caroline . . . Jessica . . . Benjamin . . . Avielle . . . Allison.”

The speech, it should be noted, came from his own hand and heart.

He then turned his attention to the living, which is where this column usually heads. It  should be read and thought about by everyone, but especially by Family Court judges, Family Court “specialist” lawyers, Family Court “child evaluators”, the justices on the Courts of Appeal, the justices on the State Supreme Court, and the mothers and fathers caught up in the throes of divorce and the, always, always, unavoidable betrayal of their children.

Obama said “This town reminds Americans what should really matter. . . ”

He pointed out that the nation is failing at what he called “our first task,” which was to care for the children of the nation.  “It’s our first job. If we don’t get that right, we don’t get anything right.”

He then asked: “Can we truly say that we are meeting our obligations? Can we honestly say that we are doing enough to keep our children — all of them — safe from harm? . . . a chance at a good life, with happiness and with purpose? If we are honest with ourselves, the answer is no. We are not doing enough, and we will have to change.”

We can’t tolerate this any more. These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change. In the coming weeks, I’ll use whatever power this office holds to engage my fellow citizens, from law enforcement, to mental health professionals, to parents and educators, in an effort aimed at preventing more tragedies like this, because what choice do we have? We can’t accept events like this as routine. Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage, that the politics are too hard? Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?”

I hope I will be excused for focusing my thoughts on our living children – all ages, from young to old. They are still with us, they are not lost, and we still have a chance to get it right. Let this be a way of making amends for the dead.

Here is the full speech and text.


The result of what Adam Lanza did was evil, no question about that.

But was his intent evil? I don’t think so, because I don’t think that children are inherently evil.

In this case, we know that his mother collected guns, and stocked food and supplies to protect her family from the “fiscal cliff” which she believed was about to descend on this country.

Look at these three mental states, which may exist in a toxic combination. And if they enjoy a comforting shared existence between parent and child, beware!


Is it possible that Adam thought he was doing a good thing, was saving his mother from enduring what she feared because he loved her, and decided to symbolically extend that kindness to other young people, and send them to heaven where they’d be better off? Or did he hate her, and was trying to teach her a lesson? We don’t know. Only professionals with deep psychological insight are qualified to guess with any hope of accuracy. And they’ll only get to do this if the child’s sickness of mind is certified to be a SYNDROME, and where the child can be ordered into psychotherapy without delay. Public safety and protection depends on this.

Is there any evil in the world then? Yes, absolutely.

I think that the famed British playwright and philosopher George Bernard Shaw put it best. This is from the  preface to his play SAINT JOAN. I know it well, for I directed it for Broadway, following one of my wife Lynn Redgrave’s wishes to play the part of Joan.

He said

There are no villains in the piece. Crime, like disease, is not interesting: it is something to be done away with by general consent, and that is all about it.

It is what men do at their best, with good intentions, and what normal men and women find that they must and will do IN SPITE of their intentions, that really concern us.

I heartily agree with this assessment. And I go along with it, because of greed and the money-motivating element. I am prepared to state that in my opinion there is no doubt, from the perspective of my experience of these people, that Judge Arnold Gold is EVIL, that divorce attorney James A. Eliaser is EVIL, and that divorce attorney Emily Edelman is EVIL. There are others, measured by the same definition, of course, who had their own equivalences, and were similarly terrorized. The victims can name who they are for themselves.

Meanwhile, I belong to no party, I have never voted, and I thank God that we have a president for the people with sensitivity, legal knowledge, political awareness, a moral compass, and the power and integrity to use it wisely for the good of not just America, but the future survival of the world.