Was David Eisenhauer a Jekyll-Hyde-like psychopath?

February 11, 2016 at 8:25 pm | Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Torrential rain on Thassos island, Greece, photo by Edal Anton Lefterov, 6 July 2011.

Torrential rain on Thassos island, Greece, photo by Edal Anton Lefterov, 6 July 2011.

You probably have heard the horrifying story.  (If not, you can read about its various aspects here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.)

A sweet, cheerful, friendly, affectionate young girl, Nicole Lovell, in Blacksburg, Virginia, had overcome challenges that most of us will never face. She overcame lymphoma (a type of cancer), had a liver transplant, and a trachoetomy. The tracheotomy left a scar on Nicole’s throat.

Doing so took courage, fortitude, the strength of character to overcome fear, to endure physical pain. It entailed loneliness from being separated from her friends. It caused her unease about falling behind her classmates. What she did was nothing short of heroic. Her parents were subjected to staggering burdens, which they lovingly accepted.

The tracheotomy scar and Nicole’s medical absences from school made her the target of bullying and snubs at her middle school.

That, and her entry into adolescence, made her eager for a boyfriend. She sought one on social media. At 13 years old, in middle school, she thought she had found one, David Eisenhauer, 18 years old, an athlete and accomplished student at nearby Virginia Tech. She was proud and happy: she now had a handsome affectionate defender, and a living proof that she was lovable and attractive. For a girl in middle school, he was a trophy. She dreamt of starting a family with him. She spoke of running away with him.

At some point they had sex. At some point David Eisenhauer decided to kill her. He and a friend of his, Natalie M. Keepers, plotted for a month on where and how to do it. They bought a shovel. He had a knife. They selected a secluded spot on campus.

In November 2015, David arranged for Nichole to sneak out of her house to meet him in secret.

On the night of November 27, 2015, she climbed out of her bedroom window to meet him. She must have been happily excited and eager: she had even told a friend that she was going to run away with him (but not when). At some secluded location David stabbed Nicole to death. He and Natalie took Nicole’s body a little across the border of North Carolina and buried her.

Was David Eisenhauer a Jekyll-Hyde-like psychopath?

No, not according to what his roomate and others say.

Why then did he plot with a friend, for a month, to cold-bloodedly murder a sweet, trusting, affectionate young girl, Nicole Lovell, who adored and trusted him?

Here is a guess.

According to those who knew him, David Eisenhauer is intelligent, and is focused on the future.

He knew he had made a very serious mistake when, probably in a moment of weakness, he had earlier had sex with Nicole Lovell. Since she was a juvenile and he was not, if their sexual activities ever became known, he would be classed as a sex offender who took advantage of an under-age girl. For the rest of his life he would have to declare himself to the local police wherever he lived, and he would have to obey restrictions that barred him from proximity to schools and playgrounds, and even those used by his potential future children. If the sensible proposal to mark the passports of sex-offenders is eventually approved, some countries would thereafter deny him entry. He would be shamed in the eyes of his parents, friends, and classmates. Even his family would be disgusted by him, and would feel let down by him, and would even feel shame at having raised him.

Because of the bullying she had suffered, Nicole Lovell had a pattern of boasting about any evidence that she was lovable and attractive. In particular, she had boasted about him, on social media, and Nicole Lovell’s friends knew about him. David Eisenhauer knew that it was only a matter of time before Nicole boasted to her friends about having sex with him, and then that damning fact would quickly become widely known. All the bad consequences would ensue.

So David Eisenhauer felt that he had no choice but to silence Nicole Lovell by killing her.

He revealed his quandry and his plans to fellow student Natalie M. Keepers, a close and supportive friend, and enlisted her help.

We know what happened next. David Eisenhauer compounded his earlier serious crime of having sex with a minor by the far more serious crime of murder.

But suppose the plot had succeeded, and the murderers had never been identified?

After the murder, the only person who knew David Eisenhauer’s secret was Natalie Keepers. She herself had in the past been bullied, and was somewhat unstable – perhaps as a result of the bullying. So she was the only remaining threat. She was emotionally unstable. She might blurt out the secret during some therapy session in the future, or during some future dispute with David Eisenhauer.

Natalie Keepers was lucky that she and David Eisenhauer were caught.

Most likely, David Eisenhauer still had the knife and the shovel.

The scenario described above is just a guess. But it could explain what had seemed inexplicable.


If you want to comment on this post, go here. To avoid cluttering the ‘latest postings’ page, WordPress includes the mechanism for commenting only on the page for the individual posting, never on the page that shows all of the recent postings. So click here, scroll to the bottom of the post, and submit your comment.

Modern Domestic Slavery

April 17, 2013 at 8:33 pm | Posted in Fairness | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , ,
A child pulling a tub of coal in an underground mine, during the Victorian era. From www.victorianweb.org/history/ashley.html, a educational site offering free info on the victorian age.

A child pulling a tub of coal in an underground mine, during the Victorian era. From http://www.victorianweb.org/history/ashley.html, a educational site offering free info on the victorian age.

————————————————————————————————————

Petula Dvorak has just published an article in the Washington Post about a particular case of modern domestic slavery.  I urge you to read it.

The abuse was substantial but not sexual.  It turned out better than in many other cases of human trafficking.  But the victim is still cowering and hiding from the couple that exploited her, as if she were in a witness protection program.

Justice has not been done.  The abusers have not been punished, and they have not been prevented from victimizing other young women.

The following actions would provide justice, and would protect others from the same abusers.

1 – The victim should be enabled to call home, and tell her adoptive family in Africa that she is safe, but in hiding.  She should describe what the family “friend” and his wife did to her.  She should urge her parents to warn others in their community, because the abusers were from that community, and are likely to fish there again.

2 – The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) should obtain a search warrant to retrieve the victim’s passport and visa.

3 – The victim’s Embassy should be alerted, so that the abusing husband and wife are never again allowed to enter the country where they recruit victims.

4 – The abusing couple should serve prison terms, and should also be required to pay their victim at least $100k.

More on Homeless Children

February 12, 2013 at 1:32 pm | Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Obdachlos - Homeless mother and children, 1883 or earlier.  From the Illustrirter Katalog der internationalen Kunstausstellung im Königl. Glaspalaste in München 1883, 4. Auflage, München, September 1883 (Digitalisat der BSB). Photographed by Fernand Pelez.

Obdachlos – Homeless mother and children, 1883 or earlier. From the Illustrirter Katalog der internationalen Kunstausstellung im Königl. Glaspalaste in München 1883, 4. Auflage, München, September 1883 (Digitalisat der BSB). Photographed by Fernand Pelez.

Petula Dvorak’s recent article in the Washington Post vividly draws attention to the cruel injustice to homeless families – and in particular, to the children in those families – that results from the present policies in Washington, DC toward homeless families.  The article is likely to apply to many cities.

Dvorak’s moving account nicely complements a post (Homeless Children at School) in this blog.

I won’t repeat here what is in the article or in the blog post, but I recommend that you look at both, if you care about what kind of world you live in, and about what kinds of people will be living in your world in the near and medium-term future.

Instead I’d like to draw your attention to something that at first has no relation to the topic, but is actually very relevant.

Zachary Karabell recently published an article that takes a fresh look at the deficit – which is topic A these days – and arrives at startling but convincing conclusions.

Zachary Karabell points out that deficits are debt, and, depending on what it is used for, debt can be either a prudent investment, with future payoffs, or can be spendthrift and dangerous.  He points out that the present discussion on the deficit incorrectly assumes that all debt is bad.  Historically, that is not true.  If well used, debt can bring us future prosperity that would be unattainable otherwise.  Historically, deficits have often been prudent and beneficial.  They can temper recessions, avert depressions, and provide infrastructure that is essential for future growth.

This brings us back to the topic of homeless parents, job seekers, and children.  For the moment, consider only homeless people who are either looking for work, or who will be looking for work when they grow up.  For the moment we are not considering those who are homeless because they cannot work now nor in the future, for reasons of physical or mental ill health.  We will consider them at the end of this post.

Both Petula Dvorak’s article and the blog post cited earlier point out the penny-wise and pound-foolish nature of the present policy.  Zachary Karabell’s findings greatly sharpen that point.  Providing resources that provide a stable, non-chaotic, respectful environment for homeless people who seek jobs, or will grow up to seek jobs, or who are raising children who will grow up to seek jobs
– will provide means for them to get off the dole, which they ardently seek to do
– will lead to more taxpayers in the future
– will reduce the number of the unemployable and the number of criminals in the future

That is, public expenditures of this type are an investment – an investment in the employability and character of people who will be part of our city in the future.  Think of it as an investment in infrastructure.  People are the most important infrastructure.

Now about those who are homeless because they cannot work now nor in the future, for reasons of physical or mental ill health.  Our policies to them are a more purely humanitarian issue.  What kind of people do we want to be?  What kind of world do we want, insofar as we can influence it?

Homeless veteran in New York, 13 December 2008, http://www.flickr.com/photos/josjos/3105382896/in/photostream/, by JMSuarez.

Homeless veteran in New York, 13 December 2008, http://www.flickr.com/photos/josjos/3105382896/in/photostream/, by JMSuarez.

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.