What part of my statement are you having difficulty with? Or are you just arguing semantics, because you have nothing? He was suicidal, depressed, and delusional. His life is marked with failure, and religious extremism. If you can't get over a single word that was used as a condemning hyperbole, then I don't know what to tell you.
I'm sorry, but in your earlier post you seemed to suggest that you were more learned about psychiatry and mental illness than myself. Now, you are admitting to merely throwing around generic layman's terms without any real understanding of what you are talking about.
Let me explain something to you, while it is possible for someone as apparently sick as Chapman was at the time, to make multiple flights to and from Hawaii to New York without considerable assistance from another party,
it is highly unlikely.
People in the throws of such psychosis do not usually have the psychic energy needed for such an endeavor. Mind you, this is not the same thing as showing up at school, armed to the teeth, and going on a homicidal rampage. This incident required a considerably agitated psychotic to make extensive air travel, TWICE, in order to commit the offense.
Because manchurian candidate style "sleeper assassins" are a work of fiction, not reality. The CIA abandoned such a project because it yielded no positive results.
And you know they are a work of fiction, how?
POP QUESTION: Which do you think the more likely?:
1) That the CIA would admit to having successfully developed such a technique, which would necessitate having actually tested it and would thus admit to murder, or...
2) That the CIA would admit
disinformation regarding the development of such a technique, after information regarding its development was leaked, and then claim to have abandoned it as a failed enterprise.
You speak of cabals, and sleeper assassins as though it's the only reasonable explanation, which are fabrications, since there is no evidence to support your claims.
If Chapman did not act alone, then this was a conspired act. The next question is:
Who could possibly induce a person to commit such an act, wait for the police to arrive, and then confess to the act without being able to recall any memory or knowledge of the inducing entity?
This is not a long list of suspects.
I didn't back away from my "own diagnosis". I've actually stood by it pretty firmly, because his mental health is key to the case against him. The 9 psychiatrists who examined him will agree, since their prognosis was the same: Delusional, but competent enough to stand trial. Which means he was also competent enough to plan, and commit a murder. Six out of nine stated that he was, in fact, psychotic.
"Legally sane" only means that one is competent enough to know the difference between right and wrong. Legal competency is not the issue here. The issue is whether or not Chapman was mentally robust enough to plan and commit the offense without the assistance of another party.
Actually, he did. From all of the jobs he worked, and from living in very cheap quarters, he was able to accumulate 1,200 dollars, which he exhausted on his one way trip to kill Lennon. You see, he wasn't just a security guard, he was also paid part time by the hospital he was committed to for attempting suicide, as well as the YMCA, in which he resided. 1200 dollars is not a fortune, but it was enough to get him to New York one last time.
The only "cheap quarters" that exist in Hawaii are on the beach. So, unless Chapman lived in a tent, it would have been financially difficult, if not impossible, for him to afford such airfare at that particular time in airline history when flights between New York and Hawaii were a whole lot more expensive than they are today.
Furthermore, think about what you are saying. Even the most stable and disciplined person would have extreme difficulty squirreling that amount of money away from such meager resources. Chapman was neither stable nor disciplined. Indeed, he was in the throws of extreme mental illness.
Of course he did. He clearly demonstrated that he was capable of making, and executing plans on his ow. He had relationships, he held jobs to pay rent, he lowered his living standards...
...he thought he was Holden Caulfield, he attempted suicide by carbon monoxide poisoning, "Chapman got a job at Castle Memorial Hospital as a printer, working alone rather than with staff and patients. He was fired by the Castle Memorial Hospital, rehired, then got into a shouting match with a nurse and quit. He took a job as a night security guard and began drinking heavily.[8] Chapman developed a series of obsessions, including artwork, The Catcher in the Rye, music, and John Lennon, and started talking with the imaginary 'little people' again. In September 1980, he wrote a letter to a friend, Lynda Irish, in which he stated, "I'm going nuts", and signed it "The Catcher in the Rye".[9]
Mark David Chapman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The bottom line: Chapman was in the throws of a complete mental breakdown. It is highly doubtful that someone this sick and this agitated would travel by air as far as he did to commit the crime that he did, by his own directive. Had he shot Lennon while he was on vacation in Honolulu, the idea that Chapman acted alone would be credible. However, such is not the case.
No, I just don't put any stock into your opinion, especially now. If you want to believe that Chapman was part of some malevolent underground cabal that uses mind control assassins to kill musicians well after their musical decline, that's your problem.
As bizarre and ridiculous as the idea may be, the evidence speaks for itself. Perhaps, the worst part of it is that there may be people with considerable power and influence who are actually so vain and malicious as do something like this
merely to celebrate the reemergence of their sociopolitical dominance.