UCLA Murder-Suicide Suspect Had ‘Kill List’; Woman on List Found Dead: LAPD Chief Beck

[Angel Martin]

Source: KTLA

The man suspected in an apparent murder-suicide on the UCLA campus had a “kill list,” and a second victim named on that list has been found dead in Minnesota, Los Angeles Police Department Charlie Beck said Thursday.

Mainak Sarkar, a resident of Minnesota, is believed to have fatally shot UCLA Professor William Klug on the university's Westwood campus before turning the gun on himself Wednesday, according to LAPD.

Based on a note found at the crime scene, authorities performed a follow-up investigation at the former UCLA Ph.D student's residence and Minnesota, where they found an alleged "kill list" with multiple names on it, Beck told KTLA during an interview Thursday.

"Professor Klug's name was on that list, as was another UCLA professor who was alright,” Beck said.

Read more: http://ktla.com/2016/06/02/suspect-in-ucla-murder-suicide-had-kill-list-woman-on-list-found-dead-lapd-chief-beck/

---

looks like more than just a grievance with a thesis advisor

[Angel Martin]

1. what, no tirades against the NRA and "gun humpers" ?

oh, sorry... shooter was not an "angry white man"

[hunter]

3. Oh, did he hurt your feelings?

Or are you glad he wasn't "white?"

[Angel Martin]

4. I'm just sorry the prof

didn't arm himself, given the threats against him

I don't generally believe in carrying a gun if you live in a safe city.

But with these type of threats, you would be foolish not to.

And, even in ultra restrictive places like NY city, you can get a carry permit if facing these types of threats.

[hunter]

8. Fuck guns and the people who love them.

I live in a very dangerous city with a very high murder rate.

Why would I need a gun? To add to the mayhem?

[Paladin]

10. Ah, yes. The inevitable victim-blaming.

The prof wasn't armed, so he was complicit in his own murder, right? Pro-gun types have been spewing this sort of shit, ever since the Kitty Genovese incident. It never gets any less revolting.

[Angel Martin]

14. the murderer alone is responsible for the murder

Cases where there are specific threats are different than a random attack like the Kitty Genovese murder.

Presidents and candidates who are threatened get Secret Service protection, they would be foolish to refuse.

Professors who are threatened don't get Secret Service protection, so they need to take care of business for themselves.

And even in restrictive states like CA, if you have specific threats you can get a carry permit (see Feinstein, Diane; or Boxer, Barbara)

[Paladin]

15. If you're trying to dodge the victim-blaming thing, it isn't working. (nt)

[Angel Martin]

17. I've said my piece, no further comment needed nt

[LanternWaste]

19. No further comment needed, indeed.

No further comment needed, indeed.

You've accurately illustrated yourself for anyone to see, regardless of how you may attempt to deflect or rationalize otherwise.

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. What were "the threats against him"?

The story you linked to says:

Commenting on the post, Beck stated the stuff he saw would not have necessarily led to a police investigation.

"There were no threats ... there's been bashing, if you will," he said.

[Angel Martin]

24. the threats we know of, for now, are in (now deleted) blog posts

this has some background on similar cases, and the debate over armed faculty vs not.

http://www.ibtimes.com/ucla-shooting-william-klug-latest-victim-trend-student-violence-against-college-2377266

my father (retired science prof) was in a similar situation with someone who could not start graduate school until he passed a required undergraduate course.

If Dad had seen something like the following he would have certainly gone to the police:

“William Klug, UCLA professor is not the kind of person when you think of a professor. He is a very sick person. I urge every new student coming to UCLA to stay away from this guy,” Sarkar wrote in post dated March 10. “He made me really sick. Your enemy is my enemy. But your friend can do a lot more harm. Be careful about whom you trust.”

They did eventually call in the police when there was evidence of an office break in and an altered exam (after it had been graded). But it was all circumstantial and they couldn't charge him.

In the end Mr would-be-grad-student failed the course and had to repeat it (for the umpteenth time)

[muriel_volestrangler]

25. You linked to, and quoted, something saying "stay away from the prof"

That's not a threat. You might say it was defamatory ("he is a very sick person", etc.), but no one could go to the police with that, just a lawyer.

So, what the threats? If they've been deleted, you must be able to describe them in general terms, or link to someone who did so before they were deleted.

[Angel Martin]

28. depending on County, the threats published would be enough

you have a previous dispute between PhD candidate and supervisor over intellectual property, the university has looked at it and assessed the student claims as "workings of his imagination", then you have these blog postings with "enemy" "very sick person" etc.

California issues carry permits by county and the standards vary. It would be enough for Sacramento or Fresno County.
https://www.revealnews.org/article/want-to-carry-a-concealed-gun-live-in-sacramento-not-san-francisco/

[muriel_volestrangler]

29. Again, you haven't told us what these threats were

You do know what the word 'threat' means, don't you? 'Dispute' does not mean 'threat'. The post did not call the prof an 'enemy' - it called him a 'friend', but said those "can do a lot more harm". And, again, calling someone a 'very sick person' is not a threat.

Frankly, I don't believe there were any threats. You could have pointed to them by now, or described them.

[Angel Martin]

33. we are just going around and round on this...

given the situation of this Prof, I would have been concerned for my safety. I would have taken what I had to the County Sheriff (or Provincial Chief Firearms Officer) and made my case for a carry permit.

You don't think there is a "threat". So no point in worrying. c'est la vie.

the other faculty thought like you do. And there would have been a second faculty killed, but for the fact that he wasn't on campus that day.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3621726/The-PhD-student-shot-UCLA-professor-dead-Indian-rubber-engineer-killed-thesis-supervisor-wouldn-t-let-graduate-committed-suicide.html

If a faculty member at a university who is a stable family man with no criminal record makes an application for a carry permit, a bureaucrat like a Sheriff or Chief Firearms Officer is going to give him a very sympathetic hearing - if for no other reason than the problems that follow if he/she denies a permit and turns out to be wrong.

[muriel_volestrangler]

34. What worries me is that you use criticism to justify carrying firearms

You don't seem to understand what a 'threat' is, but you use your misunderstanding to say "he should have been armed".

[Angel Martin]

37. in my book, this is beyond normal criticism

I agree you don't need a carry permit just because a former student disagrees with your research conclusions, or doesn't like your teaching style.

but this case features repeated false accusations of theft of intellectual property, which could be slander and or libel

By all accounts the murdered Prof pushed Sarkar thru the PhD program and was responsible for him getting his doctorate (2014). Then the killer turns around and accuses him of intellectual property theft. UCLA investigates and says, no way - the "theft" is in his imagination.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3621726/The-PhD-student-shot-UCLA-professor-dead-Indian-rubber-engineer-killed-thesis-supervisor-wouldn-t-let-graduate-committed-suicide.html

And two years later, the killer has still not moved on but is posting this stuff on social media. Plus libelling the Prof as a thief, deceiver and false friend to any UCLA student that will read it.

this is all highly hostile behavior. It is beyond normal "criticism".

If I was in the Prof's situation, and Sarkar was still in the LA area, yes, I would have wanted a carry permit. Although I have to admit that given Sarkar's move to Minnesota, I probably would not have bothered and I would have suffered the same fate as Professor Klug (RIP).

[LeftyMom]

42. Hi, lifelong Sacramento County resident. Our current sheriff is a batshit crazy conspiracy theorist

who seems to think his job is to make youtube videos where he complains about Obama.

Prior to his election getting a concealed carry permit here was relatively difficult, which is how we like it.

But if you like him we'll put his kook ass on a plane to wherever you are.

[Angel Martin]

43. I'm not endorsing him or any other Sheriff

my only point was that the standards for getting a carry permit in California varied by county

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

36. "you would be foolish not to"

Sad commentary. You are victim blaming.

You know there are some people who don't want to limit your right to your precious, but aren't interested in being forced to do so themselves. Pathetic that now people unarmed in churches, schools, etc are being shamed.

[Angel Martin]

38. I'm not trying to shame anyone

Given that Sarkar had moved to Minnesota, if I had been that Prof I would have assumed the threat no longer existed, and I would not have applied for a carry permit, and I would have been killed just like Prof Klug was.

Now, if Sarkar had remained in the LA area, I would have taken all legal steps to get a carry permit.

[romanic]

11. I noticed all the "white male" comments ceased

when this guy's picture came out. :I That's why it's never a good idea to jump to conclusions on race when someone was freking shot to death. :I

[dbackjon]

12. In Arizona the opposite happens

When a murder or other crime - Trumpians come out and blame illegals, and disappear when the perp is a white male (which is a vast majority of the crimes)

[romanic]

16. Oh yeah it definitely goes both ways.

Here in SE MI the first people blamed for murders are usually black men, sometimes it turns out to be someone white or non-black and the racist trolls say nothing more.

[Angel Martin]

18. it's easy to guess

name and picture released immediately = white male

delay = some other demographic

[dbackjon]

20. You would be wrong

[Angel Martin]

13. agree completely

i did it by assuming he was a california resident.

[muriel_volestrangler]

21. Did anyone on DU mention 'white'?

I've looked through the DU threads on this that I can find - about 10, and the only mention of 'white' I can find is someone passing on an LA Times breaking headline - "Police search for 6-foot white male dressed in all black".

So why are you bringing up 'white', just because no one replied to your thread for 10 minutes?

[Angel Martin]

23. no, because every thread on DU

with a white male shooter turns into an anti "gun humper" anti NRA tirade.

no white male shooter = doesn't fit the gun control narrative => no "gun humper" tirade.

[muriel_volestrangler]

26. Are you saying you were disappointed no one started talking about gun humpers on your thread?

Oh, poor you. Your sense of victimhood wasn't fed. So you had to talk about whites, because no one else was.

[Angel Martin]

27. just commenting on usual DU practice nt

[hunter]

2. Guns are such wonderful tools for this sort of thing.

Seriously, I don't trust or respect anyone who thinks guns are an interesting hobby or an acceptable answer to any problem.

Another asshole with a gun, another day in the U.S.A..

Fuck.

[bucolic_frolic]

5. Rigid minds

bruised egos that require pampering

vindictive mindset - all a toxic recipe

in the land of an eye for an eye, the one-eyed man is king

or something like that

[Person 2713]

30. Agree toxic recipe

[LisaM]

6. How long had the woman been dead?

That's weird.

[47of74]

9. For Christ's sake

At what point do we get to keep guns away from the mentally ill? What the fuck is it going to take?

[hunter]

32. I'd say the desire to carry a gun is a symptom of something...

... and it's never good.

I'm not sure so-called "responsible gun owners" want to go there.

[Angel Martin]

35. I'd rather be alive

and just live with your "disapproval"

[hunter]

39. Me too.

[Angel Martin]

31. the woman killed in Minnesota was the shooter's wife

She was a medical student named Ashley Hasti. What a waste



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3621726/The-PhD-student-shot-UCLA-professor-dead-Indian-rubber-engineer-killed-thesis-supervisor-wouldn-t-let-graduate-committed-suicide.html

[intrepidity]

40. Game of Thrones fan? n/t

[Angel Martin]

41. no, have never seen it

(don't watch TV)

[tblue37]

44. Reporters need to think about what they have written before they publish it.

The linked article says of the shooting that left the killer's wife dead in Minnesota,

"Early indications are the shooting occurred prior to the UCLA event," a Brooklyn Park police news release stated.

"Early indications" be damned. Since the shooter committed suicide after killing Professor Klug, so his body was found in the same office with Klug's, he had to have killed his wife "prior to the UCLA event"!

(I am reminded of one's student paper about ACL injuries that referred to purchasing "a knee brace for your knee." Some things simply do not need to be said.)

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. The reporter was quoting what the police news release said

and the police were, correctly, not stating definitively that Sarkar was the killer of his wife before a proper forensic exam had been done. We as readers can assume that he was, but the police's job is to find out for sure.