I don’t get the outrage here. This wasn’t the killer’s childhood home or anything special to him. IIRC it was a student apartment he rented for a few months while attending college. He was being evicted because he had withdrawn from classes.
You can’t make a shrine out of everything. Nobody was killed at this apartment. It’s a place the guy slept and used the toilet. Nothing more.
They aren’t exploiting the property. It isn’t advertised as a killer’s home. To suggest tearing down an entire apartment building because one asshole lived there for awhile doesn’t make sense. Think about all the students that depend on those apartments while they attended University.
These people need to calm down and accept the fact that student apartments come up for rent every semester or two. They can’t throw a hissy fit every time.
One solution would be to change the street name or apartment building name. They did that at the Condo where OJ’s wife was killed. They also changed the front a little so looky-loos can’t find it as easily.
I guess no one should live in Germany because Hitler used to live there, right?
That’s how silly this is.
Why should the landlord have to take a loss on the property just because some asshole used to live there? If anything, the only person who should be allowed to get upset about this is the next tenant if no one tells before signing the lease. And I’m sure there are plenty of potential tenants that wouldn’t care.
It’s not outraging, it’s just a tad unusual. Often times places like these are bulldozed and replaced by unrelated developments.
It’s unusual, which is good for some, bad for some, and meh for the rest of us. There are those who would never dream of living in such a place… then those who have a macabre fascination that will make them actually attracted to the place. I’d be surprised if there aren’t James Holmes fanatics vying for the place.
Then of course are the victims families, who cannot really be expected to behave “rationally” on any matter concerning James Holmes. They probably feel disgusted that anyone could psychologically stomach living in a place where their loved one was tortured to death… and especially disgusted by the thought that anyone would actually be attracted to the situation.
Perfectly legal, though. Perhaps in the best financial interests of the owners.
Why are you saying people were tortured to death there? James Holmes was the Colorado movie theater shooter. No one was harmed in his apartment at all.
Ahh, boy do I feel silly. I got the story mixed up with another one. I will now go drown my head in a bucket of steamed porta-john waste as punishment for my scatterbrainedness.
The condo was razed to the ground and a totally new dwelling was put on the spot. The street name is the same but they may have modified the number. One of my Mom’s oldest friends has lived around the corner from that spot for like fifty years. Their neighborhood was a nightmare for years because jackass lookyloos had to have their picture taken in front of that place.
Ah, of course! Being a Chicagoan I should have guessed. Anyway, someone took care of that place long ago as it ‘mysteriously’ burned down not too long after he was caught, so no worries there.
As for this case, who knows? Maybe someone’s all worried that crime tourists will come by to stare or that some wannabe will want to rent it out, but I think that’s rather farfetched. The modern equivalent of the Holmes castle would probably be that house in Cleveland where those women were held captive, and I’m all in favor of that place being destroyed.
James Holmes had such incredible potential to do something important in life. He should be in a lab doing medical research by now. It’s a tragedy that his mental illness went untreated until after he killed all those people in that movie theater. A lot of lives were lost that day and his life and future is finished too.
Holmes’ connection to that student apartment building is so short lived. It would be different if he had killed victims there. Tearing down a building that houses college students isn’t logical.
Yeah, this one doesn’t make much sense. He didn’t kill anyone at the apartment (not for lack of trying). He didn’t live there long. It’s a rental, so he never owned it and won’t get any money from this. It’s also one unit in a larger building, so closing it or getting rid of the whole building is totally impractical. I wonder how many victims’ families the Daily News had to call before they reached someone who said something angry enough to justify its inclusion in the article.
This isn’t worth a news story in the first place. It’s poor judgment by the Fox affiliate, and the report itself was embarrassing - loaded with stuff about the shooting and Holmes’ bombs that aren’t relevant to the apartment now. I think the criticism should go to the news outlets, not the two family members who want the building destroyed. How would you feel if someone called you out of the blue asking for a comment on some obscure aspect of this story that affected your life this way? If they start organizing demonstrations, I’d say they’re being ridiculous. In this situation they just got trolled by the Daily News or TMZ.
Absolutely a tempest in a teacup. Rent it out and let its former tenant be forgotten.
This past year, the mother of the man we like to call Doucheybeard McWhineybritches (you may know him as Anders Behring Breivik) died, and her apartment was sold. He had lived there in the years before the bombing and mass shooting, although not immediately before. There was a bit about it in the papers, and the apartment ended up selling for a lower price than what you would expect given the location and all, but it sold. Someone else is living there now, and I think it’s a good thing. I hope that person makes it their own and in the process eliminates all traces of the previous occupants. Because even though McWhineybritches may have sat in one of the bedrooms and plotted and schemed, the walls didn’t soak up some sort of magic evil essence. The floors are not coated with the musings of a twisted mind. It’s just an apartment.
It’s a bit more difficult when it comes to the places where they committed their crimes. In the case of the Colorado shooter, that question seems to have been settled already - the movie theater, it appears, remains a movie theater.
