House of Lincoln

24

Psychology: Behind Doors
A Thorough Analysis of Lincoln Loud's Bedroom, By: Dr. Albert Fuschi.

          Days after the death of a young boy, the suspect was arrested and tried as an adult in court, where the case resulted in a 32 year sentencing to federal prison. The victim's family attended the trial, including the victim's two fathers, his grandmother, his grandfather and his uncle. When interviewed by Michigan Report, it was admitted by the family that none of them were satisfied with the result of the case, and two of the jurors after the trial agreed that the case was "unfortunate all around." There was a question of motivation that was asked multiple times throughout the trial and was never fully answered. Instead, it was summed up as another case of possible childhood neglect that contributed to the defendant's adolescent sociopathy.

         With the case ending surprisingly quicker than expected of a case with such complexity, a lot of the media had not covered the case, as it had ended before many stations were finished covering the preceding Football-Frenzy Tournament, which occupied a large percentage of middle-class family homes during the time and is Michigan's most anticipated televised event. A case of this nature is extremely curious, considering it brings to light topics such as the psychology of adolescent murderers and the sadistic methodology children use when committing criminal actions. It's a very interesting study that some colleges may examine in Child Psychology.

          It's without question that the defendant had committed the murder he was accused of. Fourteen-year-old Lincoln Loud showed many signs of schizophrenia, antisocial personality disorder, and persistent depressive disorder. These signs were observed by many of the people who surrounded Lincoln, though his family themself found this behavior to not have shown at all, and that around them he seemed to be normal, and they even questioned the arrest and the sentencing with vehemence. Even his father passionately disrupted the trial by shouting "How do you people not see it? All these things he does are normal for a kid his age! What do you see that's wrong with him?" Loud's family consistently shows ignorance to his worsening mental complications over the course of his life and after the murder, claiming repeatedly that none of them saw anything odd about the kid. The only exception being his little sister Lucy, who talks about him in a different manner that contradicts what his family states.

    "Since the beginning of January around two years ago, I could tell he was struggling. I had difficulty approaching him, so I stayed kind of distant. That's how I've always been. Looking back now, I wish I had talked to someone about it." (Quoted from the interview conducted by Criminal Investment.)

          Its a wonder why his little sister was the only one who acknowledged his abnormal behavior, and it's even more odd considering the fact that both Lucy and her family have admitted that the two (Lucy and Lincoln) we're never very close. Lucy stated in the same interview by Criminal Investment,

          "He sometimes would try to speak to me, but I was a very quiet person. Again, I always have been. I mean, we would say something to each other every now and then, but it just wasn't very affectionate."

          When the trial had taken place, a very large portion of evidence stemmed from Lincoln's room, which housed various concerning notes and items that were used as evidence against Lincoln's sanity and stability. Among the items, there were: Knives, the head's of dolls (later revealed to be his sister Lola's), broken pens that had been snapped in half, ink splotches on the walls, writing on the walls, carved sentences and pictures in the walls, printed photographs of insectile eyes, bottles with varying levels of water and urine (the urine was used to create the argument in court that he had not left the room for several days at a time, not even to eat or use the restroom), different kinds of paper with concerning written messages and conspiracies, books on philosophy taken from his dad's study, used and broken erasers, and a torn purple sweater.

These items were used both by the prosecution and the defense to create a story that would support their arguments. The prosecution argued that these items showed "clear obsessive and unstable activity," which was a very credible point that ultimately helped them win the case. The considerably less favored and controversial argument the defense presented claimed that these items in his room showed "an indication of a dissociative identity disorder, which would render Lincoln's perception of the world to be altered," adding also that "this would mean Lincoln was not aware that what he did was wrong, and he can not be guilty if he wasn't aware of something like this." The defense's goal was achieving the mental incapacity defense, otherwise known as NGRI, or "not guilty by reason of insanity." This strategy was ineffective, and dismissed.

The uniqueness of this case is not Lincoln's family and their ignorance, nor his collection of concerning items, but rather the mystery of what drove him to become so mentally disturbed and murder what kids at school labeled his "best friend." (Details obtained from the interviews conducted by Michigan Investigation Articles). Many people online (even the prosecution) offered the argument that his family's ignorant nature is actually a front to hide their involvement or participation in child abuse. This is, however, a very serious accusation and it has little evidence to back it up, so it should not be considered credible nor reliable. Some people online have created a theory that Lincoln had been raised normally, and became disturbed without any reason at all, transforming arbitrarily. This theory also holds little evidence and should not be considered credible either.

The case itself is a puzzle that could be studied and researched many times over, and it's bizarre nature would still confuse the common inquirer. Psychologists across the globe have dug into the case, only to produce differing conclusions from each doctor. It is likely a case that will live on as an unexplained mystery for decades to come, and may never be solved in the future. It is also likely that nothing to be studied from here on will resemble this case, and it will always be an oddity unique to itself.

Dr. Albert Fuschi, Psychology: Behind Doors