I understand you're simply presenting the other side (and no worries, I didn't down anything - not that either of us probably cares) but unfortunately, in situations such as this, there is no other side. What he went thru, the state he must have been in when he committed the murder, is a moot point because then the question becomes, what of the family members of the man he killed out of revenge? Crime begets crime, each act then justified by the prior. Crime of passion is non sense - an intentional murder, whether it's on a out of control lunatic level or a self-contained, calculated level, is an absolute crime, not a subjective account. I understand losing a family member destroys the person but that's why laws exist - so that what is right isn't swayed by overwhelming emotion the involved parties may feel towards the issue at hand. In fact, understanding his feelings is the last thing we should do if we were to judge his actions for crime committed. Sure, he's a "functioning member of society" but what happens if another tragedy happens to him? Each and every day of the year, someone somewhere is losing a family member but they don't all pursue some path of vengeance. Those who do, therefore, are clear anomalies, anomalies that present unpredictable danger to the society. This man DOES pose further threat in the future. It's an ongoing question what the true function of prison system should be - to rehabilitate or punish - but I think people often forget the most important reason prison system exists: to withhold individuals who pose threat to safety and freedom of others from perpetrating the society. Again, I know you're not condoning him and normally, I'd be all for someone presenting both sides and playing devil's advocate, but sometimes, a murder is just a murder, no matter how you spin it :/