Just 2 Seconds (98 page)

He explained his thought process about Rebecca Schaeffer being an easy target: "It's not like she had Gavin de Becker or anything."

The cases of Bremer and Bardo, and nearly every other modern-day assassin, offer irrefutable proof that:

• Public figure pursuers usually pursue more than one potential target;
  
• the ultimate target selection process is significantly influenced by the pursuer's perception of a potential victim's approachability and accessibility;
  
• targets are interchangeable; and
  
• pursuers make attempts on those they believe are most vulnerable and accessible
  

Still, our firm continues to battle the misconception that "if they want to get you, they will get you." Recently, within a nine day period, two well-known executives were hit with pies. There was no physical harm done, and one could say these incidents were merely embarrassing. But, in fact, they are very hurtful to the safety of public figures.

The two incidents occurring proximately illustrate that public figure attacks often occur in multiples, as potential attackers are encouraged and empowered by media reports of successful attacks. Furthermore, both cases reveal to pursuers a gross vulnerability of these public figures, and suggest that one could likely have used bullets rather than pies with equal ease.

After the second attack, a client of ours (one of the world's most famous executives) photocopied an article reporting the incidents and sent it to us with a dark humored handwritten message: "I guess I'm next."

We immediately responded: "No, you are not next. You have a program in place to deter such attacks, or to interfere with one should it be attempted. Unlike these guys, you do not stroll into public appearances with some assistant through the front door. You have a protective detail at public appearances. You have an advance agent who assesses sites before you arrive. You are transported by a trained security agent in a specially modified vehicle. You arrive at and depart from sites through controlled non-public thoroughfares. The answer is simple: you are not next."

Public Posture on Security

Whether or not the general public is ever aware of a public figure's security and privacy precautions, it is important to communicate that some attention is paid to safety and privacy. In fact, how the topic is promoted or presented in the media is itself a key precaution.

Really, public figures "compete" for inappropriate pursuers, just as they do for fans. There is a finite community of these pursuers out there, estimated at around 100,000. Our office maintains a database of over 24,000 individuals who have pursued or sent inappropriate communications to our clients. Most of these pursuers have also sent communications to other public figures.

Obviously, acquiring more pursuers than other public figures is NOT a desirable form of popularity, but it is often so that the same characteristics which make a given media figure attractive to fans may make him or her attractive to potential attackers. There is one characteristic that can be promoted which reduces the number of unwanted pursuers without reducing the number of fans: it is inaccessibility.

Yet some public figures (more often, their publicists) believe that it is bad publicity to promote an unapproachable image. Actually, most normal fans and supporters expect famous people to be protected. Popularity itself is often a universally accepted explanation for someone's security concerns. Still, uninformed "experts" attempt to weaken our protective details because they are afraid security will be visible: "Don't be too close; don't be so obvious; don't have two people," etc.

Though many people are quick to express their opinions about security, we know that in the event that we ever find ourselves under-staffed or under-prepared for a safety emergency, those who expressed uninformed opinions will vanish ... and we will be left to explain any failures.

The lesson for security professionals is clear: Never alter or reduce the scope of a protective detail to satisfy someone's concern that security might be noticed -- it isn't worth it.

The fact is if a journalist decides security will be the topic of a story, then it will be -- and it won't necessarily be based upon anything we did. For example, there have been reports of some client "surrounded by security," when in fact there was only one visible security agent ... and one publicist, one attorney, one business manager, one assistant, one friend, and so on.

The way a famous and interesting person lives, what he does, where he goes, will all be explored and speculated upon by journalists. The question is, How can it be presented so that it serves safety and deters unwanted pursuers, instead of inviting them? Reports that "a guard answered the gate at the residence," or "a guard stood quietly outside the dressing room," or other reports which indicate a public persona with boundaries, make a public figure less attractive to pursuers. However, reports that a public figure "shuns security precautions," or "lives like a regular guy," or "enjoys morning walks alone" will encourage and empower pursuers.

At the end of many successful protective details, our client's smiling publicist says, "See, I told you we were over-doing it with the security. Everything was fine." But we take comfort in knowing that merely by our presence and demeanor, we communicated a strong warning to any unwanted pursuer who may have seen us: "If you want to successfully attack a famous person, it won't be this one."

Appendix 12

On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs
by LTC Dave Grossman, author of
On Killing
and
On Combat

Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age. It does so because honor is, finally, about defending those noble and worthy things that deserve defending, even if it comes at a high cost. In our time, that may mean social disapproval, public scorn, hardship, persecution, or as always, even death itself. The question remains: What is worth defending? What is worth dying for? What is worth living for? -- William J. Bennett, in a lecture to the United States Naval Academy November 24, 1997

One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this to me:

"Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident." This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another. Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year, a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime. But there are almost 300 million Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in a hundred on any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.

Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep.

I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me it is like the pretty, blue robin's egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers, and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful.? For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators.

"Then there are the wolves," the old war veteran said, "and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy." Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.

"Then there are sheepdogs," he went on, "and I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf."

If you have no propensity toward violence then you are a healthy productive citizen, a sheep. If you have a propensity toward violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath, a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero's path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed

Let me expand on this old soldier's excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial, that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids' schools.

But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid's school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep's only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their child is just too hard, and so they chose the path of denial.

The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.

Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa."

Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.

The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the little lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door.

Look at what happened after September 11, 2001 when the wolf pounded hard on the door. Remember how America, more than ever before, felt differently about their law enforcement officers and military personnel? Remember how many times you heard the word hero?

Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed right along with the young ones.

Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, "Thank God I wasn't on one of those planes." The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, "Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference." When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.

There is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, but he does have one real advantage. Only one. And that is that he is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population. There was research conducted a few years ago with individuals convicted of violent crimes. These cons were in prison for serious, predatory crimes of violence: assaults, murders and killing law enforcement officers. The vast majority said that they specifically targeted victims by body language: slumped walk, passive behavior and lack of awareness. They chose their victims like big cats do in Africa, when they select one out of the herd that is least able to protect itself.

Some people may be destined to be sheep and others might be genetically primed to be wolves or sheepdogs. But I believe that most people can choose which one they want to be, and I'm proud to say that more and more Americans are choosing to become sheepdogs.

Seven months after the attack on September 11, 2001, Todd Beamer was honored in his hometown of Cranbury, New Jersey. Todd, as you recall, was the man on Flight 93 over Pennsylvania who called on his cell phone to alert an operator from United Airlines about the hijacking. When he learned of the other three passenger planes that had been used as weapons, Todd dropped his phone and uttered the words, "Let's roll," which authorities believe was a signal to the other passengers to confront the terrorist hijackers. In one hour, a transformation occurred among the passengers -- athletes, business people and parents -- from sheep to sheepdogs and together they fought the wolves, ultimately saving an unknown number of lives on the ground.