Prosecutors allowed to examine James Holmes' college records

The defense for James Holmes, the man accused of shooting 12 people in Aurora, Colorado, hoped to keep his college records out of the case. But on Wednesday, a judge ruled Holmes' records fair game for prosecutors.

Bill Robles/AP
This courtroom sketch shows suspected theater shooter James Holmes during a motions hearing in district court in Centennial, Colo., Sept. 20, 2012. On Wednesday a judge determined prosectors will have access to Holmes' college records.

Prosecutors in the case against accused movie theater gunman James Holmes can see his college records that could shed light on the former graduate student's intent and motive, a judge ruled on Wednesday.

Lawyers defending Holmes sought to prevent prosecutors from viewing his records at the University of Colorado, arguing that the request was "a fishing expedition."

Holmes, 24, is accused of killing 12 people and wounding 58 others during a screening of "The Dark Knight Rises" at an AuroraColorado, movie theater on July 20.

Prosecutors have said Holmes failed his oral examinations at the university in March, and was told by a faculty member that perhaps he was not a good fit for the competitive neuroscience PhD program.

Holmes then began a voluntary withdrawal from the school and amassed an arsenal of weapons as part of "a detailed and complex" plan to commit mass murder, prosecutors charge in court filings.

While noting the defense's argument that motive is not a required element to prove guilt, Arapahoe County District Court Judge William Sylvester ruled that the documents could reveal Holmes' state of mind leading up to the rampage.

"Intent will be a key issue at trial, and it is likely that facts relevant to prove motive will tend to make the issue of intent more or less probable," Sylvester wrote.

He also ordered that any files kept by the university's campus police on Holmes should be turned over to the government.

Defense lawyers have said in court that Holmes suffers from an unspecified mental illness. Legal analysts see this as an attempt to set up a not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity defense.

Holmes has yet to enter a plea, and prosecutors have not indicated whether they will seek the death penalty.

Editing by Dan Whitcomb and Mohammad Zargham

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.