[ary]

It's difficult to read this and not think that a psychopath was let off the hook because he was young. Outing and labeling these kinds of people is important to curbing the amount of future damage they can do.

There is bullying, there is harassment, and then there is what the OP experienced. No reasonable, rational individual who is just "acting out" in adolescence takes it to these levels. As much as I feel for the OP he should have taken legal action and had the youth examined by a credible mental health professional if only as a favor to others.

[wamatt]

As much as I loathe being the guy defending trolls, the level of judgement expressed in this thread is a bit troubling.

Labeling this kid a 'pyschopath' might feel nice, but it's rather inaccurate. [1]. Specifically when he saw the damage he'd caused, a very human emotional response of remorse and regret kicked in. We have no reason to believe it's fake, especially given we weren't the one's there, and the author believed it to be genuine.

That said, I found this to be a really touching story, and am amazed at the kindness and wisdom of the victim.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy

[yread]

You can read more about the value of tears of a psychopath here

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/assessment/2...

Harris married his deceitfulness with a total lack of remorse or empathy—another distinctive quality of the psychopath. Fuselier was finally convinced of his diagnosis when he read Harris' response to being punished after being caught breaking into a van. Klebold and Harris had avoided prosecution for the robbery by participating in a "diversion program" that involved counseling and community service. Both killers feigned regret to obtain an early release, but Harris had relished the opportunity to perform. He wrote an ingratiating letter to his victim offering empathy, rather than just apologies. Fuselier remembers that it was packed with statements like Jeez, I understand now how you feel and I understand what this did to you.

"But he wrote that strictly for effect," Fuselier said. "That was complete manipulation. At almost the exact same time, he wrote down his real feelings in his journal: 'Isn't America supposed to be the land of the free? How come, if I'm free, I can't deprive a stupid f---ing dumbshit from his possessions if he leaves them sitting in the front seat of his f---ing van out in plain sight and in the middle of f---ing nowhere on a Frif---ingday night. NATURAL SELECTION. F---er should be shot.' "

[SilasX]

Okay, that would demonstrate that we should place little weight on expressions of empathy, but I disagree if the implication is supposed to be that it's evidence of psychopathy.

Remember, genuinely remorseful people would say the same things to their victims. If you're going to take genuine-looking apologies as evidence for the psychopath diagnosis, then you're falling into the trap of "If she prays at the execution, that confirms she's a witch. If she doesn't pray, that confirms she's a witch."

The relevant evidence in the above link is the journal, not the apology.

[yread]

I wasn't accusing or executing him -- just pointing out this other case I've read about (linked from HN, I think) where the psychopath faked emotions. I'm not even saying this boy faked them. Just that the fact that he broke down doesn't have to mean much.

[jopt]

So if he cries, it's because he's a witch trying to trick us?

[ary]

First, I'm well aware of the definition of psychopathy. Second, psychopathy is not a binary condition. An individual can be on a spectrum of severity, or (as has been noted by people researching the condition) psychopaths can and do mimic the responses to emotion that they see in others but do not feel themselves. Perhaps he is or perhaps he isn't, but without additional action of the part of the OP and the kid's parents there is no way he will be properly diagnosed until something similar, but more severe, might happen.

So, yes, we are making judgements in this thread, but not everyone here is being "judgmental." Making a considered decision about available evidence is a reasonable act. The repercussions of this young man's actions should not have been watered down because of his age, and especially not in light of the toll it exacted on his victim. Others might be calling for extreme punishment, but I am calling for appropriate response.

[debacle]

It's very easy to fake a very human emotional response, especially when those around you are sympathetic (e.g your parents).

[Quarrelsome]

Ummmm... my brother was a terrorist when he was 17. He used to blow up stuff on the posh estate and severely vandalise properties striking legitimate fear into the hearts of those that owned them (people moved their kids away etc).

I myself was charged for criminal damage, firearms and threatening behaviour when I was 15 years old.

When you have difficulties in both school and personal life you end up doing crazy things at these ages because you are so divorced from reality. You don't know responsibility because you don't have any you don't even understand how money _really_ works so you don't appreciate the value of other people's things. All you care about is your own pain and try to find an outlet for it. You're also a bit self-centred so you never appreciate the things others or your parents really do for you.

I actually think its relatively common for people around this age to do really scary things such as this. I personally believe its a product of our present system that treats teenagers effectively as second class citizens. Without choice and any control in their life the "worst cases" end up doing really strange stuff.

[MartinCron]

If you haven't yet, I would like to encourage you to share more of your story. You seem to have both a fascinating history and solid self-awareness.

[Quarrelsome]

It's really not that special. It possibly sounds much worse on paper than it actually was. I pointed a replica gun at someone and my brother repeatedly vandalized a neighborhood over the course of a few weeks. With hindsight its the same as this kid, his crime was "just" sending abusive mail. It's only when you look at this from the perspective of those that suffered because of the actions that it feels so terrible.

We were just spoiled middle-class kids, my brother a militent marxist and myself just angry at being shut down due to my age all of the time. Compound that with the social cruelty of other children in school and home problems (relatively minor #firstworldproblems) and you get what I think is a relatively standard outcome. It might be alien to those that didn't have any difficulties in their childhood but I'd suggest its fairly common for kids to go off the rails like this.

The really interesting stories are probably from those that live in care. I used to hang around with some really troubled kids that came from proper, really difficult backgrounds (i.e. not just #firstworldproblems). Less of those people surface into what I imagine we'd call "proper society" as a lot of them understandably never lose their victim complex, constantly feel persecuted and continue to lash out throughout their entire lives. However a lot of them do patch over their past problems and become excellent contributors to society.

From my perspective it's amazing the difference in mindset that can happen to people as they grow out of their teens and into their twenties. To me it was like a completely different world and one that I was really good at and suited me much better. This is why I bitch a little about the school system and how we treat our children I personally think there is a severe disconnect between the two "worlds". That's what I really wanted to address to the parent of my comment. I think that calling someone a sociopath because of something they did in their teens suggests a lack of understanding in troubled childhoods.

[Tichy]

Maybe you underestimate how charged today's atmosphere is. You get confronted with things like this every day - violence in the media, news, school yard, newspapers, books, video games. Peer pressure and what not. Kids beating each other up, filming it and putting it on YouTube.

I don't know if that kid is a psychopath but I can imagine lots of other reasons for how he got caught up in that "game".

Also I am not even sure about the psychopath verdict - I get that differences in the brain have been found (ie underdeveloped regions responsible for empathy). But that doesn't imply that it is genetic/not curable. I've read the same brain structures have been found in abused children, for example. And the famous London cab drivers with their enlarged brain regions for geo-spatial-whatever-things. They certainly were not born to be cab drivers - so if their behavior can make brain regions grow, why shouldn't it be possible to learn more empathy?

[seanmcdirmid]

The kid in this case needed help. Maybe he'll turn out as a bad adult, but its not too late for this behavior to be corrected so he can lead a normal life. Now, if you think the best way to do that is through the legal system, I'm not sure, especially if the legal system is more interested in punishing vs. reforming. The author did the right thing, I think.

[yelsgib]

What is the difference between a "reasonable, rational" individual and an "unreasonable, irrational" individual?

What is the basis of your faith in "credible mental health professionals?"

[lwhi]

> What is the difference between a "reasonable, rational" individual and an "unreasonable, irrational" individual?

The degree to which the individual can co-exist with other members of society.

[ErrantX]

I think the OP opted for the latter ("credible mental health professional") when demanding counselling, but left off the former ("legal action").

I tend to agree with him, and I think in a way you are too... the important issue might not be in making him pay for his harassment, but understanding how and why he did those things (and then treating him if needed).

Criminalising him adds.. what?

[enneff]

What would you recommend for this kid, apart from counseling?

[ary]

I'll speak for myself, as if I had a child that acted in this way.

The first, and most important response would be to establish why. With actions like this being carried out in and from my own home I would have to immediately reassess my level of involvement with my child and whether or not I was culpable via omission. Very soon thereafter I would seek out the advice of people directly involved with the study and treatment of psychopathy and sociopathy and have my child assessed. From there it would be up to the outcome of that assessment.

Perhaps that's not the kind of clear cut answer you were (possibly) looking for, but I think it comes down to whether or not it was an innate or developed problem.

[Tichy]

He did demand that they go to counseling with the kid.

[cturner]

Particularly for those who are new to remote communication, it can be as trivial as not groking that this kind of interaction is just as real as face to face conversations. Just because you don't see the reactions doesn't mean that they're not there.

As we grow up, we're socialised with other people in the same space and you get trained to a kind of empathy. The patterns of interaction we reach by the time we're 17 aren't a default - if you spend time with people who were home-schooled you can detect that they evolve differently to kids schooled in the common form.

When we encounter remote communication, it's a new world. There's a much thinner feedback loop. Perhaps you usually use the other person's expression as a guide in your interaction, and then feel uncontained when it's missing. Without this constraint, a normally civil person become a monster.

Evidence that normal people become monsters is all around us:

1) Internet trolls, "I have an opinion. You aren't playing along. My opinion is sufficiently correct and the matter important enough that it's justified for me to grind you into the ground." And there's no tangible payback.

2) The way people talk in customer-to-business relationships, particularly where there is a difference in leverage and it's a one-off relationship. People in high leverage positions become accustomed to doing things without regard for the people they affect (e.g. insurance companies). It's common for people in low-leverage positions to become extremely aggressive in their conduct to try and compensate for a strategically poor position.

3) The way people drive. The driver sees themselves in a situation where they are competing for position. Subconsciously, "I don't care what you think because I'll never see you again." This is moderated somewhat by mandatory training, and by the risk of an accident which could create an embarassing and costly situation

4) Look at the way we behave towards animals we eat vs pets. The complex supply and investment chains are a machine that takes all kinds of humanity out of the field.

I've found a taste of distilled evil in the online version of the board game Diplomacy. The game is oriented around deception, with only minimal details of the other players.

I thought the handling of the matter excellent.

[kvnn]

I would remove him from the environment that fostered the behavior. I'm surprised that the OP, the kid's parents, and no one else (I've seen) in this thread has mentioned this.