by Guy Page
The accused shooter of three Palestinian men Saturday, November 25 in Burlington has a lengthy police interaction history that includes reports of mental illness, domestic abuse, and unwanted behavior towards women. That history, as reported by Seven Days, does not include any religious/political explanation for the alleged shooting.
Seven Days editor Sasha Goldstein dug into Eaton’s background in his November 30 story, “Defendant in Triple Shooting Had Alarmed Two Ex-Partners.” [Editor’s aside: When it comes to indepth reporting, no-one in Vermont does it better than Seven Days, as this story demonstrates.] Here’s some of what he found:
- In 2013, a Syracuse, NY woman told police she had been in a domestic relationship with him and had been a victim of abuse. She gave police a shotgun he owned, saying she wanted no contact with him.
- The woman told police Eaton had a history of mental illness.
- Six years later, another woman asked DeWitt, NY police to tell Eaton to stay away from her, after she had received text messages of a sexual nature. Police did so and Eaton complied. She filed a protection order against him, she said.
- Between 2007 and 2021, Eaton was involved as a complainant, victim or otherwise in 37 reports to Onandaga County police agencies.
- “I’m not seeing anything where it’s like a big history or anything that’s racially motivated,” Lt. Matthew Malinowski of the Syracuse Police Dept. said.
Eaton is being held in prison without bail, after pleading innocent to three charges of attempted murder. The victims are all recovering.
The failure, as yet, to uncover any racial or religious ‘hate crime’ motive for the killing has left some Vermont pundits apparently groping for a public policy angle. “This ought to spark a serious look at our gun laws, but I ain’t holding my breath,” said John Walters, publisher of The VPO.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Burlington, Crime
I remember when John Walter’s used to have some credibility, before WDEV and Seven Days dismissed him for cause.
It’s sad to see the deluded caricature of a journalist that Mr. Walter’s has embraced.
My bad. I meant to say VT Digger fired Walters, not WDEV.
WDEV fired Dave Graham when he went off the rails advocating for violence to reach political goals.
The automatic knee jerk reaction to go to gun laws is simplistic and thoughtless; in my humble opinion a product of short attention spans and laziness. It would make more sense to fix the broken mental health care system and address other social and cultural issues, like broken homes and poverty. None of it simple, and all of it requiring work.
No, no, and just no! This was a “racial” attack against Palestinians; Mayor Miro told us so!!! And he’s always right, er, I mean left!!!
So, who knew this person with mental problems owned a handgun?
Same issues same answers as before. See what I said here:
https://vermontdailychronicle.com/three-palestinian-men-shot-in-burlington/
As a side question….
Wasn’t there laws on the books to stop him from getting a gun. If so the system again, failed or let him have it. Another person who should never have had a weapon. ie, GUN
“Between 2007 and 2021, Eaton was involved as a complainant, victim or otherwise in 37 reports to Onandaga County police agencies.”
And no one knew of this? Come on man!
This adds to my original thought on the subject…. FF.
The gun laws which prevent gun acquisition by someone with a mental health condition have huge holes in them. Pretty much unless you were involuntarily committed it won’t flag you when you get screened to buy a gun. Self disclosure of a mental health condition would but who would do that? It’s not that I want more gun laws but I would like to see a better way to prevent mentally unstable people from buying guns.
Actually with a quick online search, you can see until the new law took place here is the restrictions;
You cannot own a firearm if you:
Have been convicted of a violent crime;
Have been convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for over a year;
Are a fugitive from justice;
Illegally abuse controlled substances;
Have been adjudicated as mentally defective of incompetent, or have been committed to a mental institution;
Are an illegal alien;
Are a former US citizen who has renounced his citizenship;
Were dishonorably discharged from the US Armed Forces;
Are subject to a restraining order; or
Were convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
Notice the last two lines.
“Six years later, another woman asked DeWitt, NY police to tell Eaton to stay away from her, after she had received text messages of a sexual nature. Police did so and Eaton complied. She filed a protection order against him, she said.”
No, there is a record for restraining orders unless I am mistaken. Not so sure about looking for TROs but usually a RO is a big no no.
Don’t know 100% ( never had a RO or otherwise) about VT, but I doubt he would get one in NY under those conditions listed above but I do not live in NY so I do not know nor do I know how many times if at all he was denied.
Replying to Shannon McLamb:
But these accounts occurred outside the state as did the acquisitions of firearms. And to my knowledge, there is no border patrol inspecting your personal belongings when you cross the state line. So how would gun laws in Vermont affect someone who moved here 6 months ago and limit their access to weapons? I’m pretty sure there is “No duty to notify” of the jurisdiction in which someone resides, to alert the jurisdiction to which they move to… so how would any laws be effective? And I know for a fact, at this point in time, you don’t need anyone’s permission to move to another state…. so again, how would these laws work? Not disagreeing with you or trying to be argumentative, it’s just that the laws aren’t even applicable since the offenses and purchases occurred out of state.
And for the rest of the commentors: Mental illness is not a one and done. It is sometimes a spectrum. And many never get help, get reported or even have difficulty maintaining a “normal” life while struggling. And unless you want a chip implanted that would alert another entity that you are struggling with homicidal or suicidal thoughts or any other number of unacceptable human behaviors, how would any of these mental health “red or yellow flag” laws actually be of any use whatsoever? It’s a little like shutting the barn door….
The scenario most liberals want is a Minority Report type system. Doesn’t work. Many times, humans get frustrated, angry and have irrational thoughts…doesn’t necessarily make them mentally ill. Might make them “temporarily insane” to use an antiquated term. You can’t base a lawful action on a thought. Yet.
Just my two cents worth….
Pam
He bought the pistol in VT but obviously there was nothing in his record that prevented this.
I am replying to all that ask. if you ask the simple question in a search field you get this from a lawyers site:
https://www.baxterharder.com/blog/2020/september/does-a-restraining-order-appear-on-a-background-/
and the important part
“Most thorough background checks examine court records, so the record of the restraining order will most likely be revealed to the person looking for it”
Honestly anyone who has has a BGC for a gun should know they look there too. I too as i originally said something is afoot.
Hunter Biden. How was he able to obtain a firearm? Oh, he lied on his application. Discharged from the Navy for cocaine. A handgun registered found in a dumpster near a school. An abanonded rental car with drug paraphernalia inside. C’mon man!
Those “in charge” cherry pick and gaslight with specific words to plant seeds of fear, discourse, and division. Wordcraft witchcraft. For those following along: patterns of deception and fraud all have common threads. Notice the national attention because the “victims” just happen to fit a certain type that coincides with a certain international incident that provoked division and discourse. All this unfolding within a month or so? They have to work fast because the jig is flying up and people are waking up to facts over propaganda.
Make no mistake, the currency of the enemy is fear. The more fear they can implant into the public consciousness, the more distraction and division. With that, they can continue to get away with the thievery as well as retain power and control that is not theirs to begin with – scamdemics, staged events, and manufactured crises wouldn’t exist if they did not exist. Discern and reconcile all timely and “shocking” events…the Truth reveals itself.
We can certainly take a look at that AFTER you tell us how you will positively and comprehensively ID the ENTIRE population of those who are mentally unstable in this country. Once you can do that, MAYBE then we can talk about taking away rights. How’s that sound?
Has anyone considered mandating background checks or mental health screenings to hold an elected position or a judiciary position? Perhaps that time has come and likely 60-75% of them would be found ineligible. Looking at you, The Biden. Carry on.
Because of HIPPA purchasing a firearm depends on the purchaser telling the truth on the application form. It also depends on factual arrest and conviction records.
We value medical privacy and the civil rights of the mentally unstable more than we have political will for enforcing the current federal gun laws. These are decisions that we as a society have made, and we as a society have to be prepared for the inevitable and predictable consequences. I am not willing to give up ANY of my Constitutional Rights because we refuse to hold dangerous individuals responsible for their actions.
what ever we do, don’t look in the medicine cabinet, nothing to see there, keep going…….
yes, keep giving our people drugs that make them suicidal and homiscidal…..then we can take away the guns from the all the citizens…..
don’t look in the medicine cabinet….
Precisely…we hold Big Pharma responsible for those who misuse pain killers and our Attorney General has sued them for big money. Why are we not holding them responsible for all the other mind altering drugs that are strongly statistically associated with violent and aberrant behavior? A certain percentage of the population are “whacked”, but we as a society have made a decision to not pre-emptively confine dangerous individuals, like we did 50+ years ago. The predictable consequences of that decision are no reason to compromise the Second Amendment Rights of those who are law abiding and well behaved.
Just to throw another perspective into the mix:
Gun laws are big lobbyist issues… agent provacateurs are usually easy pursuaded vulnerable people with mental health issues, whether post-military, or just deluded people whose fantasies fit with: kill “OTHER” — this is NOT going to be solved with more gun laws.
Legislating laws around mental health beCAUSE it is never one size fits all.
Wouldn’t you love it if there were a one size fits all when you child reaches their teen years, to ‘fix’ their insanity during their growing up period? No? Why not?
This man has issues the system hasn’t fixed.
Because it addresses guns as the issue…not HIS problems, individual to HIM… or because he doesn’t want to get fixed, and likes how he is.
THEN the law should intercede and put him away from any social contact…i.e. prison.
But yeah… lets focus on the non-issue and blame the gun.
Isn’t it interesting in these high profile cases the perps all seem to have similar backgrounds, same issues, known to law enforcement, and the three letter agencies are all over it before an investigation commences or one report is officially filed. Here’s your sign.
The United Nations is pushing hard to take away all guns, as they are a violation of human rights. As I always say to people, “All roads lead to the UN.”
Let’s see, so far we have a mentally unstable white guy, shooting three innocent Palestine college students, this story still sounds fishy !!
So, if Eaton is mentally unstable, what made him snap? three young men wearing
some sort of a scarf Nah, there is something missing in this story.
Burlington has crazies all over town, and as far as someone wearing their national clothing that too is all over Burlington…………..the whole dialogue is fishy.
I agree with all those who still aren’t satisfied with the narrative or “facts” we are being given. Something’s afoot. Maybe Mr. Eaton was being handled by someone? Maybe this is a false flag…. or maybe it is just a cigar….
Interesting situation, and more interesting will be to see how it plays out.
Agreed. Tons of people wearing keffiyehs around Burlington. And they don’t stand out in terms of looks. Just weird situation from the get go.
“Mental illness” is a broad and subjective call. This man’s past seems bad at first glance, but a few sentences don’t tell the whole story. I underwent psychiatric intervention until the age of 14. Later on, I underwent extensive testing and tested negative. We still haven’t been told what occurred between Eaton and the 3 young men. Many Palestinians who come to the U.S., especially VT, may be involved be violent groups and even be wanted for serious crimes. VT is a safe haven.
We simply don’t have much information.
Hi, Pam Baker. I just wanted to reply to you regarding your question about filling out forms when moving to another state, and how a purchaser’s criminal or illegal activities in one state might have any bearing on his/her being able to purchase firearms in another state.
Form 4473 is a federal form that all FFLs must have all purchasers of firearms fill out. The questions asked on the form, and the background performed by the FBI NICS system, are irrespective of your state of residence; it is all federally regulated.
As one poster mentioned above, those filling out the form can lie. When I worked in a gun shop, there as one fellow who answered yes to the question about having been committed to a mental institution. We didn’t have to go any further. We told him he was ineligible to legally purchase forearms. End of story.
Another fellow had renounced his US citizenship thirty years earlier to marry his Canadian wife. He answered yes to the question of renouncing his US citizenship. End of the line. Done. Nope. We told him he could not legally purchase a firearm.
How many people were marijuana smokers who lied on the form about being an illegal user of marijuana? It did not even matter if it was legal in Vermont (which it was not yet at that time). Marijuana use was not legal from a federal standpoint, and the feds (the BATF) said you can’t legally purchase a firearm if you’re illegally using it.
One time a guy came in to the shop reeking of pot. He filled out the form and checked no to the box asking if he was an illegal user of marijuana. I made a judgment call and refused to proceed with the sale.
My point in saying all this is that the feds regulate firearm sales; they already have very specific restrictions on who can and cannot purchase firearms. By and large these laws are quite effective when combined with the mandatory FBI background check every single firearm purchaser must submit to. The problem is if/when people do not answer the questions on Form 4473 listed above truthfully. Therein lies the rub: criminals will lie and cheat to circumvent and break the law.
Is there some way to better ascertain if a person is telling the truth when he/she answers those questions? That might prevent to some extent firearms from getting into the hands of those who should never have them. But again, criminals and psychopaths bent on hurting and killing other people will find ways to get those guns no matter how stringent the laws are.
The government is not delegated the authority by our Constitution to compel us to waive our guaranteed 4th Amendment right to be secure from unwarranted interrogation, search, or seizure in the absence of probable cause of criminal conduct. Or compel us to waive our guaranteed 5th Amendment right to due process as a precondition to being allowed (or denied) the exercise of our right to keep and bear arms. This violation of our 4th and 5th Amendment rights happens every time that we are interrogated under penalty of perjury without probable cause that a crime has been committed when we fill out B.A.T.F.E form 4473 to purchase a firearm.
They mentioned the magic words, mental illness, which means Sarah George may or may not prosecute this guy for three attempted murders. It’s as open and shut a case as one could wish for, they have three living witnesses as to the identity of the shooter. I frankly don’t care if he’s nuts or not, get his butt off the streets.
Whether his place of residence is a prison or some secure mental facility, he has proven that he can not live freely in society. Lock him up…permanently.
I have found Seven Days to be useful for starting my woodstove and nothing else.
Why are these three men, who were out parading their hate in the streets, still being referred to as “palestinians” when there is no such thing as “palestinians”? No country, nation or state called “palestine” either. There is still no motive stated for the shooting of these three terrorists and I have yet to see any proof that Mr. Eaton has committed a crime. Mr. Eaton has been accused of being abusive to women so what does that have to do with these three gruesome males who someone ventilated? This whole s-show stinks of a false flag cooked up to provoke the gun control nuts in Montpelier. If you are a good guy no gun for you, but it’s okay if terrorists use guns to slaughter whole families?
The SevenDays should be considered essential reading for any Vermont conservative based some of the best advice garnered from the movie The Godfather… “keep your friends close, and your enemies closer”…but always grab an extra copy for the woodstove.
false flag the shooter just happened to living at the right house at the right time bad choice of weapon for murder mkultra bad smell
I personally thank all of you who replied with excellent information and thoughts on the topics I queried. We didn’t purchase firearms until we had moved back to New England… Vermont, from out west. And I didn’t remember what was asked on the forms or indeed the process itself other than having to fill out forms and wait. Special thanks to Martin Green.
Based on what all have shared, what good does a form do? (Not that I ever would have supported any infringement on our God given Constitutional right) In reference to the Lewiston Maine incident, indeed what good did any law do? Laws are only as good as the folks who enforce them. Again, and as always, it is incumbent upon friends and family to intervene and do the right thing for our struggling family members. But in the end, if someone wants to do something… they are going to do it come hell or high water.
Shannon you have some good ideas around controlling who can have firearms except the part about the restraining order. I know of three men who have been divorced by their wives; blindsided. Part of that process is the wife telling the judge that she’s afraid to be in the house with him for whatever reason. “Afraid of him” seems to be popular and accepted by lib judges. These three men were met at their own house by the police and escorted away due to the restraining order. They would lose their ability to bear arms after doing nothing wrong except maybe being a bad husband. None of the three are dangerous and none had intent to hurt their wife. This is part of the VT divorce playbook and it happens all the time. Shouldn’t lose your rights over lies.
I’ve personally seen it several times too. Lawyers often recommend it as a matter of course in divorces. Extremely common legal tactic as there’s no repercussions for her whatsoever, even if she later says under oath it was a lie. She starts off the negotiations with him out of the house, her with the kids, and him paying her money. Oh, and he’s socially vilified. Nasty stuff. The fix, of course, is to create some legal consequences for abusing the law and lying about such an important matter for nothing but leverage in a divorce.
A TRO is as it says, temporary, whereas a full RO is after swearing and in front of a judge, anyone who lies can be caught and in trouble for lying. This is a prime example of LAWFARE. In most cases a man cannot get a lawyer to defend such a claim and as stated above, they are sprung on the man for just that, lawfare.
The stuff they do today over RO is disgusting.
My wife having suffered at the hands of a monster long before I arrived in her life, got the FIRST nationwide lifetime restraining order against her ex husband. She is livid as to what is done to get a RO today. Problem is too many courts ignored it and when in family court they took her kid and gave it to that same abusive man. Not a good thing.
No I am sure HE cannot get a gun but also, I am not sure because I am honest and would / could not fill out that form and lie.
The problem is that some states and jurisdictions are not comprehensive about placing individuals with ROs into the federal NICS database. The whole point with dealing with criminals and antisocial miscreants in general is that the “honor system” doesn’t work with them.