Category Archives: diversity

blog, diversity, news, race

Goh profile expands; He wanted his money back from Oikos U.

As more information is revealed about the Oikos University shooting suspect One L. Goh,  a conflicting profile emerges.

Is he an awkward but failed would-be womanizer?  An angry consumer who wanted his money back ? A crazed gunman?  Or a cold-blooded execution-style killer?

At a media conference on Wednesday, Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley offered a new twist when she said Goh  was not kicked out of Oikos, but had left voluntarily  last November.

Earlier reports said Goh left at the beginning of the year for “bad behavior.”

But O’Malley indicated  a key reason for the voluntary departure was a disagreement over the return of admission costs. Goh wanted his money back. The school had refused any refund.  This may explain why a school administrator is believed to have been his main target.

Police had originally said Goh was angered because people made fun of how he talked, and his accent.

One instructor, Romie Delariman, told the Chronicle, that  Goh seemed to be looking to the school as a source of friendship and companionship, when he should have been looking to the school to learn.  He apparently wasn’t successful in making the personal connections he sought.  Some said it was how he talked to people as much as how he sounded.  Delariman went so far as to described Goh as “mentally unstable.”

When O’Malley was asked whether anything could have prevented Goh’s outburst, she dismissed any notion of mental instability.

Said O’Malley:”I don’t think this individual (Goh) particularly displayed any behaviors anyone saw that would have predicted the magnitude of his murderous rage.”

How can she be so sure? At least, one instructor appears to dispute that statement.

The case is being set up for the death penalty, with the special circumstance charges against Goh. 

O’Malley’s  got Goh’s voluntary admission, And her confidence level is high.

I wonder if anyone has advised Goh of his legal rights before he “confessed”?

For as much as O’Malley said at the media conference, she did show some restraint by not answering more detailed questions. Of course, she was protecting the “people’s interest.”

Someone should be protecting Goh’s. 

He’s charged with horrific crimes.  If he’s guilty, let’s let that come out after he gets his due—a fair trial.

blog, diversity, news, race

Should Oikos University take some blame in how it treated Goh?

One L. Goh, the Oikos University gunman gets his perp walk today. It’s not the nursing school graduation he hoped to have some day.

Hard to see how it could have been any different as more is revealed about Goh.

The Chronicle has an interview with Romie Delariman, Goh’s nursing instructor.

She calls Goh “mentally unstable” and “paranoid.”

 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/04/04/MNLR1NU3F1.DTL

But if the intstructor was correct in her assessment, why didn’t the small school attempt to address the issue? 

In the Virginia Tech shooting, much was made of how the local mental health care responders did come in and make a difference in 2007, but it was all after the fact.

All the post-mortems of that tragedy still come to the conclusion that the overall access to mental health care at the school was lacking leading up to what became the most violent school shooting in U.S. history.

But that was big Viriginia Tech. This is small Oikos U.  It seems that given the more intimate setting of the Oakland nursing school there should have been a little better effort to connect Goh to the help he obviously needed.

Instead, it seems it help usher him out the door. Was Oikos Goh’s safety net that failed?

Go to my original piece posted on the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund blog:

http://aaldef.org/blog/no-model-minority-the-alienation-of-oaklands-one-l-goh.html

blog, diversity, movies, news, race

Updates: HBO’s “Luck,” PETA, Dharun Ravi

If you saw the latest “Luck,” on HBO, it’s curious how the American Humane Association logo, and the “No Animals were harmed” disclaimer still appears in the credits. Maybe none were harmed in that episode, but with the record of the show of at least 3 deaths, who can say?

The phrase “no animals harmed…” has become such a cliche that it’s unclear what it really means anymore. And now we know what it’s meant on “Luck.”

The reaction to my piece about my wife and luck at http://blog.sfgate.com/eguillermo
 has been interesting.

A few took me as bragging about my wife’s work as a PETA VP.

But I was merely sharing an insider’s perspective of how real modern day activism works. It’s not just picket signs and demos. It’s practically investigative journalism. And in this case there is a symbiotic relationship between the activist and the media that most people don’t realize.

The other thing I’m amazed about is the reaction from the horse racing industry to the cancellation of “Luck.” The industry should be happy the show was cancelled. “Luck” focused on a “Sopranos” goes to Santa Anita story line that made the whole enterprise of racing look sleazy, dishonest and populated by degenerate low-lifes. I know that can make for good TV, but it doesn’t breed public trust in an industry that is dying. No one was calling for the abolition of horse racing. But wouldn’t it be nice if the game were fair and humane? As it was, “Luck” depicted the industry as just the opposite, and yet people are angry at PETA for uncovering the deaths of the horses which led to the canceling of the show. “Luck” defenders like to shrug off the horse deaths by saying accidents happen. Yeah, sure, in real races. I go back to the basic issue: Real horses shouldn’t die in fake races.

“Luck” had no real defense. Its cancellation was humane, considering the production wasn’t.

RAVI, TYLER CLEMENTI, AND THE RUTGERS CASE

If you haven’t seen my post go to www.aaldef.org/blog

It’s funny how hate crimes and cyber-bullying have all been rolled up into one blobby mess of intolerance. That’s good, but the broader definition will mean less clarity on hate crimes than ever, more and harsher punishment, and a whole lot less freedom in general.

Is that really what we want? Isn’t there a better way to demand we all show a little kindness, civility and mutual respect to each other?