Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TexasTowelie

(111,910 posts)
Fri Aug 2, 2013, 04:40 AM Aug 2013

Illinois university says professor who killed his Georgetown family will keep his job

Administrators at the private Millikin University in Illinois will allow a longtime psychology professor to keep his job after learning that he killed his family in Georgetown in 1967 and was committed to a state mental hospital until 1974.

The professor’s name was James Gordon Wolcott until he changed it to James St. James in Nacogdoches, after his release from the mental facility. He has taught at Millikin since 1986 and is the chairman of the university’s Department of Behavioral Sciences.

“Millikin University has only recently been made aware of Dr. St. James’ past,” says a statement issued by the university Thursday. “Given the traumatic experiences of his childhood, Dr. St. James’ efforts to rebuild his life and obtain a successful professional career have been remarkable. The University expects Dr. St. James to teach at Millikin this fall.”

The story of St. James’ past has been widely reported this week in the media. He is now 61 years old and declined to comment when reached by phone Wednesday.

He was 15 years old when he shot and killed his father, Gordon Wolcott; his mother Elizabeth Wolcott and his sister, 17-year-old Elizabeth Wolcott at their Georgetown home on Aug. 5, 1967.

Tried for the death of his father, he was found not guilty by reason of insanity in 1968. He was committed to Rusk State Hospital and released after he was found sane in 1974. The indictments for the murder of his sister and mother were dismissed because it was determined that he was also insane at the time of their deaths, officials have said.

Source: http://www.statesman.com/news/news/local/illinois-university-says-professor-who-killed-his-/nZBYk/

[font color=green]However, this story failed to mention some vital information--namely the 15-year-old boy had huffed some airplane glue. A more detailed excerpt from the Georgetown Advocate:[/font]

In 1967, fifteen-year old James Wolcott lived with his family near Southwestern University in Georgetown, Texas. By all accounts, he was brilliant; he was an accomplished musician and had a voracious appetite for reading. His father, Dr. Gordon Wolcott came from a prominent New Jersey family and was the respected head of the Biology department at Southwestern. His mother Elizabeth was a vivacious woman from South Carolina, known for her participation in church circles around town. The fourth member of the Wolcott family was seventeen-year old Libby, a Georgetown High School class officer with a bright mind and a love of music. They were exceptional people living what seemed to be a typical suburban life.

On the evening of Thursday, August 4, 1967, James joined Libby and some friends on a trip to Austin to see a show. They returned home about 10 pm and life in the Wolcott house appeared to be normal. By midnight Libby and Elizabeth had retired to their respective bedrooms, while Gordon read in the living room. Inexplicably, just after midnight, James, by his own account, sniffed some airplane glue “to give him a boost,” loaded a .22 long-barrel rifle, walked to the living room and shot his father twice in the chest. He then walked to Libby’s bedroom and shot her once in the chest, and when she fell he shot her in the face.

Awakened by the blasts from the rifle, his mother Elizabeth called out from her bedroom. James then shot her twice in the head and once in the chest. He later admitted that he had decided to kill them a week prior and had made a plan the night before. Next, he hid the rifle in the attic crawlspace above the closet in his bedroom and ran out of the house toward University Avenue. Three college students traveling from Houston to Eden, Texas saw him there at about 1 am. James flagged down their car, crying that he needed help because someone had just shot and killed his entire family. Reluctantly, the three returned with James to the house to assess the situation. While James waited outside, the college students entered the grisly scene to find Gordon and Libby dead where they lay and Elizabeth barely breathing on her bed. According to police interviews, the students repositioned Elizabeth on the bed to make her more comfortable, called for an ambulance and the police, then waited outside with James. Later, in court, one of the students described James’ demeanor as “hysterical, pounding on the porch and wondering how this could happen.” None of the college students were entirely comfortable with the situation and they were hesitant to commit to any kind of empathy or reaction. Oddly enough, when they realized there might still be someone in the house with a weapon, they “high-tailed it out of there.” James, however, did not hesitate to go into the house with them.

At approximately 3 am, Williamson County Sheriff Henry Matysak arrived on the scene, and was joined shortly thereafter by Texas Ranger Jim Riddles from Austin, and Williamson County Attorney Timothy Maresh. A family friend took a very distraught James to the hospital where his mother was fighting for her life. They were soon joined by another family friend, Reverend Wallace Chappell, pastor of First Methodist Church of Georgetown. Witness reports indicate that James was very anxious at the hospital and the Reverend asked the doctor to provide him with a tranquilizer, believing him to have been traumatized by the event. Upon receiving the news that his mother had died from her wounds, James simply said, “Thank you.” Reverend Chappell, a neighbor of the Wolcott family, took James back to the parsonage while the authorities processed the crime scene. Ranger Riddles and Reverend Chappell began reviewing the evening’s events with James who still maintained that “someone” had shot his family. According to his report, Ranger Riddles idly chatted with James about his activities with his father. Then he asked James directly, “Did you kill your parents, son?” With only a brief hesitation and a sigh, James replied “Yes, sir,” and went on to describe each of the shootings in detail. Although there are variations of the subsequent exchange, court and police reports agree that James indicated that he hated his parents, giving motive to his actions. After he was informed of his Miranda Rights, James stated he did not want a lawyer and was willing to show the investigators where he hid the rifle.


The complete article is at http://wilcoonline.com/what-happened-to-jim-wolcott-lingering-questions-span-four-decades-p820-1.htm .

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

MADem

(135,425 posts)
1. DAMN. Psychology professor, you say?
Fri Aug 2, 2013, 04:44 AM
Aug 2013

I've often heard that many people major in psychology in the hopes of figuring THEMSELVES out....

That was a stone-cold, premeditated murder.

I wouldn't want to be alone with that guy if I could help it.

TexasTowelie

(111,910 posts)
3. I never heard about this story when I was a student at Southwestern from 1983-1987.
Fri Aug 2, 2013, 05:17 AM
Aug 2013

Several of my professors were already at Southwestern and I can almost envision the scene since I lived on University Avenue (Texas Highway 29) across the street from First United Methodist Church about five blocks from campus during one summer when Georgetown had about 9,000 residents. I recall playing with my friends at 3 a.m. in the middle of the street and knew a sizable group of the "townies" (non-students). Of course, now that Georgetown has over 50,000 residents if anyone did the silly stuff that we did it would probably land them in jail on some type of trumped up charges.

I'm not trying to make any judgments about the situation because judgments have already been rendered and possibly because he was out of his mind sniffing glue. The man served over six years in a mental hospital before he was released as "sane". Apparently he was able to figure out his issues, to turn his life around and become a functioning member of society. Maybe we should keep a ray of hope that people can be rehabilitated instead of locking them away forever. However, it is still a tragic story that nearly was forgotten.

loudsue

(14,087 posts)
4. I agree. These days, people don't care about rehabilitation.
Fri Aug 2, 2013, 07:15 AM
Aug 2013

They only care about punishing people. An insanity defense is really hard to prove....much harder than people think it is. Someone has to be REALLY off the farm emotionally and mentally before they can be declared "insane" for purposes of legal defense.

This is a really sad story, though. I'm sure this guy has suffered a great deal of anguish over what he did so many years ago.

Chemisse

(30,802 posts)
6. I don't think that was the case during that time period.
Fri Aug 2, 2013, 07:39 AM
Aug 2013

It was easier to plead insanity then. It is extremely difficult now, and my impression has been that this is a backlash against those times.

I can't fathom, in this day, that someone who had a plan a week in advance, carried it out according to plan, and lied about it afterwards, would ever be deemed insane in the court system.

Even Andrea Yates, who was clearly deeply psychotic when she drowned all of her children in Texas, was found guilty of capital murder! (Thankfully, a retrial found her not guilty via insanity).

Nowadays he would probably be tried as an adult and given life in prison. (Sadly, we can't seem to find a middle ground when it comes to punishing our young people).

All that said, he paid his dues under the system at that time, and I applaud the university for its stance.

loudsue

(14,087 posts)
12. You're probably right about that. I had forgotten how easy it used to be back then...
Fri Aug 2, 2013, 03:21 PM
Aug 2013

well, relatively easy, anyway. I'm glad the university stood by him, too.

TexasTowelie

(111,910 posts)
9. No, I never met St. James.
Fri Aug 2, 2013, 01:29 PM
Aug 2013

The comments at the end of the Georgetown Advocate article included a number of positive responses from some of his former students.

Though he may have planned certain aspects of the crime, it is also important to ask whether he would have committed the crime if he wasn't messed up mentally after inhaling the glue. For instance, I know that suicide idealization occurs among many people--they may plan the means of their demise and make other arrangements such as the disposition of their property, but how many of those people actually bring those ideas to fruition.

While I understand about people having the right to know about the professor's past, what is there to know? He was not convicted of any crimes and back in the 80s I doubt that most employers would have asked the question about any former names used by the professor--that question is asked more frequently on employer application forms in current times. Therefore, the university had no knowledge about the situation and can't be held to blame.

However, I'm certain that everyone is aware of the situation now. We'll find out this fall whether it has any effect when the students enroll for classes--will his actions from decades ago outweigh his reputation as an instructor at Millikin? Apparently he was able to turn his life around and become a productive member of society. If the professor did not lie on his job application, then the university most likely does not have any legal grounds for dismissal.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
10. I dunno if people have to report juvenile convictions on most job applications.
Fri Aug 2, 2013, 01:39 PM
Aug 2013

I think the reason I am wary of this guy--and I don't want him locked up or punished further, to make that point clear--is because of the heinous nature of the crime. Killing not one, but three, family members is definitely not an accident, its horribly personal, and there had to be some serious drama behind it.

I'd be less wary about a single incident of manslaughter, but hey--we only have "one life to live" as the soap opera used to say; and self-preservation would cause me to keep an eye on that fellow.

Like I say, knowing what I know about him, I wouldn't want to be alone with him if he were armed.

TexasTowelie

(111,910 posts)
11. The key factor is that there isn't a conviction--he was found not guilty by reason of insanity.
Fri Aug 2, 2013, 02:00 PM
Aug 2013

There wasn't any obligation to report the incident on a job application.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
13. I dislike that archaic verdict, myself. I think it's just untruthful.
Fri Aug 2, 2013, 03:30 PM
Aug 2013

It leads to revelations such as this one.

As humans, our minds are part of us--they aren't separate from our bodies.

I really think the legal system should evolve to create a two track path for crimes like this for people who have done the deed: either GUILTY, or GUILTY AND INSANE. If you're GUILTY, you go to the prison. If you're GUILTY AND INSANE, you go to the high security psychiatric inpatient facility for violent individuals. If you get to a point where you suddenly become "sane," then a sentencing review might be in order, somewhat akin to a parole hearing.

I just have never been a fan of "Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity." It sounds too much like a "The dog did it" defense.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
5. The article nears its close saying St. James has never had any subsequent legal problems
Fri Aug 2, 2013, 07:30 AM
Aug 2013

Last edited Fri Aug 2, 2013, 08:09 AM - Edit history (1)

Free from the label and prejudice (the social fruits of murder) usually applied to murdering mental cases he's led a life that would be measured by many as high-performing and exemplary.

And then the article adds final words that communicate how unfair -that- seems.

What's the chance readers might look at this and see that that the court got its original sentence correct and that the 6 years of treatment at Rusk helped St James aka Wolcott?

Apparently, none.

The story closes to the signature notes of sour grapes. St James aka Wolcott victims are dead and St James got to live a life when they could not.

Because if life had been fair St James aka Wolcott would have been subjected to the usual discrimination and prejudice he could have never recovered and had an exemplary, and at times rewarding, life. A good life, too good a life, that should never have been granted to one of the people known by national authorities on mental illness and crime such as Wayne LaPierre and the NRA as the "lunatics and monsters among us".

Yes, the only solution to murder is that concoction that runs through the intravenous needle during an execution.








MADem

(135,425 posts)
7. Well, I don't come to that conclusion. That said, I wouldn't want to be alone with that guy.
Fri Aug 2, 2013, 11:42 AM
Aug 2013

Particularly if he had access to a weapon.

You snap once, you can snap again. He didn't kill just one person, either. Three pops to Mom is rather passionate and personal, IMO.

He benefitted from juvenile sentencing laws, and fine and dandy with that. I don't say lock him up, but that's a pretty huge crime. I'd want to know if I were paying tuition for my 18 year old kid to taught by this person.

Sorry if that seems mean, but it's how I feel.

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Texas»Illinois university says ...